Online Education and Learning Management Systems

O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N

LEARNINGMANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

W i t h c o n t r i b u t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g o n l i n e e d u c a t i o n i n D e n m a r k a n d S w e d e n b y S ø r e n N i p p e r a n d C a r l H o l m b e r g

G L O B A L E - L E A R N I N G I N A S C A N D I N A V I A N P E R S P E C T I V E

Morten Flate Paulsen

© NKI Forlaget 20031st edition.Publisher: NKI Forlaget, Hans Burumsvei 30, N-1357 Bekkestua, Norway

P.O. Box 111, N-1319 Bekkestua, NorwayTelephone: +47 67 58 88 00/ +47 67 58 89 00Fax: +47 67 58 19 02E-mail: [email protected]: www.nkiforlaget.no

Copyright © NKI Forlaget, Norway, 2003. All rights reserved worldwide. For printed version: No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrievalsystem, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of NKI Forlaget.For electronic versions: The electronic file containing this book may only be distributed byNKI Forlaget, and institutions appointed by NKI Forlaget. No part of this publication maybe copied, sold or otherwise distributed electronically, mechanically, by photocopying,recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of NKI Forlaget.

© ”Online Learning in Denmark – A Personal Account”, Søren Nipper, 2003.

ISBN 82 562 5894 2 (Printed version)ISBN 82 562 6048 3 (PDF version)ISBN 82 562 6049 1 (Microsoft Reader version)

The author of this book has received financial support from the Norwegian Non-fictionLiterature Fund.

Drawings by Knut-André Solberg.Design by Sean Brewer, AiT.Typeset by PrePressPrinted in Norway by AiT.

mailto:[email protected]

www.nkiforlaget.no

ContentsIntroductory Part........................................................................................11

Forewords ..................................................................................................13

Preface ........................................................................................................17

Introduction ................................................................................................19The Articles ................................................................................................19The Anecdotes............................................................................................20The Web-site ..............................................................................................20

Part One: Online Education, Teaching, and Learning .............................23

Online Education Terms .............................................................................25Online Education, E-learning, and M-learning...................................................25Online Education Support Systems..................................................................26The Jigsaw Model .......................................................................................27The Hub Model ..........................................................................................28

Content Creation Tools (CCT) ...................................................................28Learning Management System (LMS) ..........................................................30Student Management System (SMS)...........................................................32Accounting System (AS) ...........................................................................32

Online Teaching Terms .................................................................................33Additional Glossaries ...................................................................................37References .................................................................................................38

Cooperative Freedom: An Online Education Theory ...............................39Distance Education and CMC .......................................................................39Distance Education Theories ..........................................................................40The Theory of Cooperative Freedom ...............................................................42Discussion of Freedom, Flexibility and Cooperation............................................46Conclusion.................................................................................................48References .................................................................................................48

Anecdote 1. Line Fjellvær: Scandinavia’s First Mobile Student? .............51

Online Teaching and Learning ..................................................................53Abstract.....................................................................................................53Seven Interesting Online Teaching Opportunities ...............................................53

O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N 3 O N L I N E

Student Needs and Characteristics .................................................................54Student Experiences and Attitudes..............................................................55Results, Grades, and Persistence ...............................................................56

Online Teaching Methods, Devices, and Techniques ..........................................58Teaching Methods..................................................................................58Teaching Devices ...................................................................................58Teaching Techniques ...............................................................................58

Teaching Functions and Facilitation Techniques..................................................59Teaching Style .......................................................................................60Moderation and Facilitation .....................................................................61Categories of Teaching Functions ..............................................................62

Evaluation of Online Students ........................................................................66Assignments ..........................................................................................66Formative and Summative Assessment ........................................................67Four Types of Assessment .........................................................................68Five Strategies to Organize and Improve Online Assessment ..........................70

Teaching Incentives and Barriers.....................................................................71Teacher Workload.......................................................................................73

Preactive and Interactive Workload............................................................75Eight Strategies to Reduce Teacher Workload ..............................................76

Further Reading...........................................................................................78Links for Further Information............................................................................79References .................................................................................................79

Anecdote 2. Bjørn Helgeby: Online Trainer of the Year..........................83

Online Teaching Techniques ......................................................................85Teaching Techniques in Adult Education Literature ..............................................85Teaching Techniques Discussed in CMC Literature..............................................86Framework for Online Teaching Techniques ......................................................92One-online Techniques: The Online Resource Paradigm ......................................93

Online Databases ..................................................................................94Online Journals ......................................................................................94Online Applications ................................................................................95Software Libraries...................................................................................96Online Interest Groups ............................................................................96Interviews .............................................................................................97

One-to-one Techniques: The E-mail Paradigm ....................................................98Learning Contracts..................................................................................98Apprenticeships .....................................................................................98Internships...........................................................................................100Correspondence Studies........................................................................101

One-to-many Techniques: The Bulletin Board Paradigm .....................................102Lectures ..............................................................................................102Symposiums ........................................................................................103Skits...................................................................................................104

O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N A N D L M S S Y S T E M S

D U C AT I O N 4 O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N

Many-to-many Techniques: The Conferencing Paradigm....................................104Debates .............................................................................................104Simulations or Games ...........................................................................105Role-plays ...........................................................................................107Case Studies .......................................................................................109Discussions .........................................................................................110Transcript-based Assignments ..................................................................113Brainstorming sessions...........................................................................114Delphi Techniques ................................................................................115Nominal Group Techniques....................................................................116Forums ...............................................................................................117Projects ..............................................................................................117

Techniques not Found to be Utilized in CMC..................................................121In-basket Exercises ................................................................................121Panels ................................................................................................121Committee Hearings .............................................................................122Cognitive Networks..............................................................................122Jigsaws ..............................................................................................122

Summary of Online Teaching Techniques .......................................................123References ...............................................................................................123

Anecdote 3. Globalskolen: A Global Primary School ...........................132

Part Two: Commercial and Self-developed LMS Systems .....................135

International Web-based Education and Strategic Recommendations for Decision Makers .................................................................................137

Global Issues............................................................................................137Competitiveness ........................................................................................138Institutional Issues.......................................................................................138Administrative Issues...................................................................................139Advertising and Financial Issues ...................................................................139Pedagogical Issues ....................................................................................140Accreditation ............................................................................................140Assessment...............................................................................................140Enrollment and Progress Flexibility.................................................................141Future Development ...................................................................................141Barriers ...................................................................................................141Eight Strategic Online Education Recommendations .........................................142References ...............................................................................................144

Anecdote 4. Online Education Obituaries ..............................................145

European LMS Experiences......................................................................151Abstract...................................................................................................151Introduction ..............................................................................................152

C O N T E N T S


Interviews and Regional Analyses .................................................................153Internet Penetration and Use of LMS Systems...................................................155Large-scale Providers of Online Education ......................................................157E-learning Standards ..................................................................................158Course Creation Tools ................................................................................159Student and Tutor Support Tools....................................................................160Administrative Systems................................................................................160Technology ..............................................................................................161Economic Issues ........................................................................................162Commercial and Self-developed LMS Systems ................................................163Commercial LMS Systems ...........................................................................163Regional Preferences and Market Leaders ......................................................166Competitive Issues .....................................................................................167Much Used European Commercial Systems ....................................................167

TopClass ............................................................................................167Classfronter.........................................................................................168Tutor2000 ..........................................................................................169Luvit ...................................................................................................170

Much Used North American Commercial Systems ...........................................170BlackBoard .........................................................................................171WebCT..............................................................................................171FirstClass ............................................................................................173Lotus Learning Space ............................................................................173

Other European Commercial Systems............................................................174Other Non-European, Commercial Systems ....................................................175European Self-developed Systems.................................................................176Important Findings .....................................................................................180Six Strategic Recommendations from the Web-edu Project .................................183References ...............................................................................................184

Anecdote 5. Fronter: The Story Behind a Dawning Norwegian LMS Success ..............................................................................................186

Part Three: Global E-learning in a Nordic Perspective..........................189

The Nordic Scene......................................................................................191Scandinavian Online Education Literature.......................................................194

Online Education and LMS Systems in the Nordic Countries ................195Abstract...................................................................................................195Introduction ..............................................................................................196

Denmark.............................................................................................196Finland...............................................................................................197Iceland...............................................................................................198Norway .............................................................................................198Sweden .............................................................................................199



Overview of the Institutions and their LMS Systems ...........................................200Course Creation Tools ................................................................................206Student Support Tools .................................................................................207Tutor Support Tools.....................................................................................208Administration...........................................................................................209Technology ..............................................................................................210Economic Issues ........................................................................................211Overall Evaluation .....................................................................................212Features in Future LMS Systems ....................................................................212Important Nordic LMS Findings ....................................................................212References ...............................................................................................214

Online Learning in Denmark: A Personal Account by Søren Nipper.......................................................................................215

The Big Bang, Big Business and Big Bucks of 1998 ........................................215Years of Experiments: The Emergence of Collaborative Learning and CBT ............217

CMC and Collaborative Learning ...........................................................218Synchronous Communication..................................................................220CBT and Instructional Design ..................................................................221Why Collaborative Learning and why not Instructional Design?.....................221

The Point of Convergence and the Coming of Age in Danish Online Learning.......222From Project Organisation to Business Organisation....................................223The Pedagogical ICT Licence .................................................................223Take the Campus Online – Sure, But How?...............................................224Learning, Management and Systems - A Ménage à Trois?............................226

Nothing New Under the Sun.......................................................................228

Anecdote 6. Nordic Virtual Universities .................................................230

On the Move Towards Online Education in Sweden by Carl Holmberg ....................................................................................233

Preamble .................................................................................................233A Country Online ......................................................................................235

Becoming a Frontrunner.........................................................................235Online Services, Online Authorities .........................................................236The Net Generation in Action at Lunarstorm...............................................23775,000 School Staff Skilled Online Users.................................................238

Societal Ambitions and Commercial Hopes....................................................240The Prosperous Future of E-learning ..........................................................240Government Policy ...............................................................................240Other Policy Making Bodies and Their Policies ..........................................244

What Has Become of All the Initiatives? ........................................................246Mechanisms to Realise Policy .................................................................246The Commercial Initiatives......................................................................247Formal and Informal Adult Education ........................................................248Higher Education and Governmental Distance Education Initiatives ................249

Still Waiting for Online Learning...................................................................252

C O N T E N T S


Questions ...........................................................................................252A Promising Future ................................................................................252The Obstacles .....................................................................................253

Anecdote 7. The Swedish Challenges: A Provocative Statement .........255

Online Education Support Systems in Scandinavian and Australian Universities: A Comparative Study .........................................................257

Abstract...................................................................................................257Introduction ..............................................................................................258Online Education Support Systems................................................................258

Content Creation Tools ..........................................................................260Integration Between CCT and LMS Systems...............................................260Learning Management Systems ...............................................................261Integration Between LMS and SMS Systems ..............................................263Student Management Systems.................................................................264Integration between LMS, SMS and AS Systems.........................................267Accounting Systems ..............................................................................267

Discussion and Conclusions.........................................................................268References ...............................................................................................269

Anecdote 8. NKI Fjernundervisning: Two Decades of Online Sustainability............................................................................................271

Abstract...................................................................................................271NKI: A Non-profit Foundation with Idealistic Aims............................................272

Structure, Culture and Processes ..............................................................274Courses and Programs ..........................................................................274Media, Methods and Learning Material ...................................................275Teaching, Research and Evaluation..........................................................276Economy and Cost-effectiveness..............................................................277Institutional Environmental Demands .........................................................277

Four Generations of Online Education ...........................................................278First Generation: Pioneering Online Education from 1985 to 1994 ...............278Second Generation: Converting to the Internet from 1994 to 1996...............281Third Generation: Moving to the Web from 1996 to 2000 .........................282Fourth Generation: Systems Integration from 2000 .....................................284

Consequences and Implications ...................................................................287Costs of Online Delivery ........................................................................287Parallel Versions ...................................................................................287Tutor Recruitment, Tutor Workload, and Tutor Satisfaction..............................288Research, Funding, Marketing Effects and Academic Contacts......................288

Twelve Reasons for NKI’s Success................................................................288And Twelve Challenges for the Future ............................................................290References ...............................................................................................291



Part Four: Trends and Future Developments .........................................293Potential LMS Improvements...................................................................295

Abstract...................................................................................................295Features of Importance ...............................................................................295

Better Systems Integration.......................................................................296Interest in Standardization ......................................................................298Local Presence, Language Support, and Special Characters .........................300Concern about Cost-effectiveness ............................................................300Multimedia and Broadband Urge............................................................301Tests, Assignments, and Evaluations .........................................................302Improved Communication and Collaboration.............................................303Better Administrative Tools ......................................................................304Simpler User Solutions ...........................................................................305More Flexible Systems...........................................................................306Interest in Mobile Learning and E-commerce ..............................................307Content Management and Development...................................................307Additional Features and Comments..........................................................308

Important Findings about LMS Improvements ...................................................310

Anecdote 9. Accessibility: Online Education for All ...............................312

A Personal View on Future Online Education ........................................314Retrospective Observations..........................................................................314The Future that Used to Be...........................................................................315Important Current Trends .............................................................................317

The Large-scale Mega Trend...................................................................317The Systems Integration Trend .................................................................318The Standardization Trend .....................................................................318The Market Trend .................................................................................319The Mobile Trend .................................................................................319The Broadband and Multimedia Trend .....................................................321The Globalization Trend ........................................................................322

References ...............................................................................................323

Sources of Further Information ...............................................................324Online Catalogues ....................................................................................324Recommended Books.................................................................................324Online Education Journals ...........................................................................325

Canadian Postscript .................................................................................327

List of Figures ...........................................................................................333

List of Tables .............................................................................................334

Noteworthy Lists ......................................................................................334

List of Photographies ...............................................................................335

About the Author .....................................................................................336

C O N T E N T S


This book comprises a rich variety of material, perspectives, insights and assessments. Valid information can be found there for researchers, for students in the field, for teachers,for managers and for politicians who are looking for reliable knowledge. It is very clear inits structure and arguments. In strategic and policy terms it discusses issues at the forefront ofcurrent debate… (Wagner, Page 14)

…online education may facilitate collaboration and stimulate discussion between people,cultures, institutions, and subject areas. It is like a melting pot for educators. Young profes-sionals who now enter the field of online education should use these opportunities to learnfrom, and build on, all the experience and controversies that come from this melting pot.(Citation from interview with the author about the book)

…in Australia, the official strategy is to develop education to become the second largestexport industry. In the Nordic countries, however, the export of education does not seem tobe an issue for public discussion. (Page 18)

One of the most obvious misapprehensions about online courses is that they should takeplace in front of a PC. Most online students spend much more time studying textbooks andpreparing assignments than surfing the Internet. Even though both text and video can bepresented online, paper is often a better medium for text and television is better for present-ing video. Still, there is a tendency among online educators to substitute excellent textbookswith mediocre Web material and superb videocassettes with a tiny, degenerated PC-version of the video. (Citation from interview with the author about the book)

An online teacher once complained jokingly that he had too many lurkers in his discussionforums and that too few online students dared to expose themselves.


Introductory part

Figure 1. Online education surpassing old Traditional University

…a Sloan Consortium study of online learning in American higher education shows that97.6% of all public higher education institutions in the USA offer online learning degreeprogrammes and courses, either as fully online programmes or as hybrid (blended) formats.But even if most European and Scandinavian universities are dragging their feet, onlinelearning will eventually be pushed onto the classical campuses by their student constituen-cies and the hard-hearted forces of the higher education market. (Page 225)

© NKI Forlaget 2003, Online Education and Learning Management Systems by MortenFlate Paulsen. www.studymentor.com

www.studymentor.com

Forewords

Dr. Erwin Wagner is Director of the Centre for Distance Learningand Continuing Education at the University of Hildesheim inGermany. He was President of the European Distance EducationNetwork (www.eden.bme.hu) from 2000 to 2003. In addition tolecturing on distance education, multimedia and e-learning, hehas worked as project manager of the multi-university VirtualCampus framework and as coordinator of the competence net-work VIA-online in Germany. Wagner has also been used as a

consultant for political bodies on institutional, national, and European initiatives regardingassessment, evaluation, and quality management.

What might you – the reader – want to learn about this new book when opening it? Let meintroduce your reading expedition by providing a few glances about discoveries you canexpect.

First of all, this is an interesting book: If possible, I recommend that you read, listen to,or view the multimedia interview (www.studymentor.com) with the author about his back-ground for writing the book. There, the author provides information concerning the (his)storyof this book, the context (of long and outstanding international experience in the field), thetargets (to open gateways between Nordic, European and international educators) and theintegration of theory and practice. Adjusted to the modern world of multi-media there is aninteresting mix of different modes. You will find very interesting theoretical concepts andsound empirical data. There are very interesting anecdotes to illuminate distance andonline education in everyday practice. And readers will find a stimulating combination ofdifferent levels and perspectives: students and teachers, technology and organisation,management and policy.

Second, I regard this as an important book: This book by Paulsen is based on the evalu-ation of long and rich experience in distance education and its shift towards online teach-ing and learning. It is very timely indeed, focussing on some of the most important issuesand tasks in the field of online education these days. In the first part you can find a broadset of useful definitions and models. It summarizes what leading researchers have con-tributed to the research and what many students and many online teachers have con-tributed to our present knowledge on how to resolve practical problems. In fact this bookvery effectively helps to create and structure this knowledge itself.


www.eden.bme.hu

www.studymentor.com

Third, it is an innovative book: It might be more precise to call it an innovative conceptshowing how to present relevant information from research and practice. And the book isjust the central part. It is the printed part only, which proves that the author does what heclaims to do: He provides appropriate resources to foster information, discussion, develop-ment and research through an intelligent combination of media for different purposes – ashe treats the issue of online education. The website will enhance the use of this printedbook with some real added value including different versions of the book for “electronic”readers, links, multimedia presentations and opening space for international online confer-ences. Regarding conceptual innovation, the presentation is based on the focal idea of“cooperative freedom” (first published by the author in 1992) which now can be regardedas one of the leading concepts among very famous ones in the history of distance edu-cation, especially valuable for online education.

Fourth, this book proves to be an international one: Paulsen claims to inform “onlineeducation professionals” around the world about innovative development and research inthe Nordic countries. Obviously there have been very relevant experiments, projects,research activities and institutional models coming from the Scandinavian countries. Someare linked to European projects (where the author has been very active). Others are basedon national or regional programmes. A few are linked to collaboration on a global level.As many professionals are quite closely following the innovative concepts and experiencesin the Nordic countries, it may be regarded a little bit “coquettish” when the author askswhether Nordic professionals, and even more so business people and politicians, are too“shy” or too much “narcissistic” to present their findings, progresses and success to theworld outside. But as he clearly states, there is much more at stake now: Online educationhas opened or widened the space for new opportunities in regional, national and globalmarkets. So far, companies and consortia from the US, Australia and partially Europe aremore or less dominating the field. To move this diagnosis very clearly into the awarenessof the stakeholders concerned, the international character of the book is a double one: Itpresents the richness and excellence of achievements in the Nordic area to the world out-side, and it emphasises that decision-makers in the Nordic countries should becomeaware of the chances and opportunities existing in the further development and exploita-tion of online education as a new “industry” inside Scandinavia.

Fifth, it is an impressive volume: This book comprises a rich variety of material, per-spectives, insights and assessments. Valid information can be found there for researchers,for students in the field, for teachers, for managers and for politicians who are looking forreliable knowledge. It is very clear in its structure and arguments. In strategic and policyterms it discusses issues at the forefront of current debate, especially in part four: “Trendsand future developments”. This shows in essence what the future of online education will beabout. It will be a very vivid, inventive and busy area where the institutions and professionalsin the Nordic countries could be a very influential part of the game, as Paulsen proves withhis own example and this book, too.

And after all, you will find this book an invitation to take part in the discussion and evenmore so in the further development and refinement of online education – in the Nordic



countries (with their very active and influential networks and organisations), in Europe(where the European Distance and E-learning Network EDEN would serve as an excellentenvironment) or on a global level. This book will reward those who read it, and then it isup to the readers to gain benefit from what they have learned.

Erwin Wagner

Ingeborg Bø became President of the European Distance and E-learning Network in 2003. She is working as Executive Directorof NADE, the Norwegian Association for Distance Education.She has also participated in many Nordic, European, and inter-national projects and committees related to distance education.At the moment she is a project partner in the Baltic-Nordic Net-work for Exchange of Experience in Open and Distance Learning(www.boldic.net).

International educators can learn from online education in Scandinavia. The Scandinaviancountries are often regarded as test beds for new technology. And the book testifies thatonline education has come further in Scandinavia than in most other countries. This is evi-dent in the advancement of large-scale provision of online education and in the integrationbetween LMS systems and national student administration systems. But on the other side,the Scandinavians do not seem to be able to capitalize on their competitive edge. A lot ofNordic students study abroad, but there is no focus on export of online education.

This book should be of interest to international readers since it presents Scandinavianonline education in an international perspective. Paulsen draws heavily on his internationalexperience from Pennsylvania State University and from participation in numerous Europeanresearch projects. The American influence is most visible in Part One: Online Education,Teaching and Learning, which is also the most theoretical part. The European perspective ismost evident in Part Two: Commercial and Self-developed LMS systems. There a number ofimportant analyses of European online education are presented from the EU-funded Cisaerand Web-edu projects.

Paulsen became one of the very first European online educators when he initiated thedevelopment of the EKKO computer conferencing system in 1986 and taught his first onlinecourse the same year. Since then, he has worked continuously in the field, participated inmany European research projects, and published a number of books, articles and reportsabout the topic. So, readers will soon discover that the book is based on practical andlong-term knowledge of the field, thorough personal experience, and research to back upthe many pointed statements.

F O R E W O R D S


www.boldic.net

Paulsen is a well-know speaker at conferences and seminars and participates often inpublic debate about online-education. In this way he shares his experience and knowledgewith the ODL-community, a fact that is highly appreciated by colleagues both in Norwayand Scandinavia. Through his active participation in the Baltic Nordic network he con-tributes considerably to the development of online-education in all seven countries involved.The educational community needs the willingness of pioneers like Paulsen to contribute to thetheoretical and practical understanding of a field in rapid change and development.

One of the most important contributions in this book may be Paulsen’s discussion onCooperative Freedom: A Theory of Online Education. But also his Definitions of Online Educa-tion Terms and toolbox of Online Teaching Techniques should be of important value to interna-tional educators.

The book includes several anecdotes that illustrate real life examples of the more aca-demic articles. These anecdotes are well written, pointed, and sometimes provocative as isthe case with The Swedish Challenges. Paulsen’s continuous work on online education isbest illustrated in his description of The NKI Internet College. It presents an interesting reviewof nearly 20 years’ development of the online education enterprise he has pioneered andheaded.

In the introduction to his book Nettbasert utdanning, Paulsen compared online educationwith the cartoon figures Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Both are teenagers conceived in theU.S. Online education was pioneered in the 1980s, and it is now approaching adult-hood. Like other teenagers, it grows rapidly and creates many challenges and muchfrustration in the process. Like the Turtles, online education can be perceived as a mutationthat appeared as a result of a collision between new technology and rigid educationalinstitutions. In the resulting chaos, online education emerged as an organism with com-pletely new genetic qualities. And the mutant may emerge as being more vigorous than itseducational origin. And it may still provide completely new opportunities for education.

Ingeborg Bø



PrefaceI have written this book for a broad, international audience ofpeople who are interested in education and the Internet. It shouldbe of special interest to students, teachers, course designers, andadministrators who are involved with online education and train-ing. It should also be of special interest to decision makers andeducational officers in both public and private sectors.

I have chosen to discuss international online education from aScandinavian perspective. There are two sets of reasons for this

approach. First, I want to give Scandinavian readers a broader international view of theiractivities. After all, online education is becoming an international arena for competition,and we could all learn from developments in other countries. Second, I hope internationalreaders may benefit from the findings made in the Nordic countries. They are all amongthe world’s most developed in the field of online education, but Scandinavian online educa-tion is underrepresented in literature written in English.

The book has an international perspective, which I have developed through nearly 20years of participation in the international online education arena. This includes my doctoralstudies at Pennsylvania State University, my work as editor of the Distance Education OnlineSymposium (DEOS), my research on online education in Australia, and my participation innine European research projects. At the moment, I am studying findings from open and dis-tance learning in the Nordic and Baltic countries as a partner in the Boldic project(www.boldic.net) and the state of the art in European online education through participa-tion in the Delphi project (www.ub.es/euelearning/delphi/).

I have deliberately chosen a Nordic perspective. As a Norwegian, I’m most familiarwith the Scandinavian languages, projects, and initiatives. In 1998, I initiated the short-lived Scandinavian online education project Nordisk Netthøgskole with Danish and Swedishpartners. Some of my research has also included Finland and Iceland. The book’s Nordicperspective is most prevalent in the anecdotes. They all present examples of online edu-cation in the Nordic countries. The anecdotes are meant to be easy-to-read, but thought-provoking, examples that illustrate and vitalize the more theoretical articles.

I have worked at two institutions that have become large providers of online education.NKI in Norway has termed its initiative Nettskolen (www.nki.no), which means the schoolon the Net. Pennsylvania State University in the U.S. has named its initiative the WorldCampus (www.worldcampus.psu.edu). These initiatives are in many ways similar, but thenames more than indicate the very different American and Scandinavian attitudes andambitions. This is further illustrated by the fact that in Australia the official strategy is to


www.boldic.net

www.ub.es/euelearning/delphi/

www.nki.no

www.worldcampus.psu.edu

develop education to become the second largest export industry. In the Nordic countries,however, the export of education does not seem to be an issue for public discussion.

Scandinavian institutions have world-class competence in subjects such as mobile com-munication, environmental studies, fish farming, offshore oil drilling, shipping, and interna-tional aid and peace operations. To utilize these areas of competence in global courses,Scandinavian institutions that are not proficient in English may employ course designers inthe U.S., technical support staff in India, and student counselors in Ireland. But unfortu-nately, it is more likely that American tutors and course content will dominate Scandinavianonline education – just as American textbooks already dominate Scandinavian highereducation.

I have deliberately chosen to combine theoretical articles with more popular anecdotesincluding pointed formulations, and personal experiences. I hope this untraditionalapproach has contributed to making the book an informative, interesting, and enjoyablereading experience.

In my opinion, online education may facilitate collaboration and stimulate discussionbetween people, cultures, institutions, and subject areas. It is like a melting pot for edu-cators. Young professionals who now enter the field of online education should use theseopportunities to learn from, and build on, all the experience and controversies that comefrom this melting pot. So, please treat the book as a starting point for further discussion andas an inspiration to improve future online education.

September 2003,Oslo, Norway

Morten Flate Paulsenhttp://home.nettskolen.com/~morten/



http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten

IntroductionThis book is a collection of carefully selected articles and anecdotes. Some are updatedand revised versions of material I have published earlier, a few sections are translated fromNorwegian, and others have been written especially for this book. The selections, revisions,changes, and additions are above all made to present a cohesive book with a Scandi-navian perspective on international online education. However, readers should be able toread each article separately and in the order they prefer. One consequence of thisapproach is that alert readers will find that some issues are referred to or repeated in morethan one article.

The articles are longer, research based, theoretical contributions. In between thesearticles, there are a number of anecdotes. It is important to understand that these anecdotesare personal contributions, intended to illustrate interesting online education practice. Theyare not meant to be representative and objective. Instead they are colored by my personalexperiences, opinions, and long-time relations with NKI Distance Education. It has beendifficult to write a book that operates on two levels with theoretical articles and personalanecdotes. I hope I have found an interesting balance between the two.

The ArticlesThe first part of the book discusses online education, teaching, and learning. It presents mydefinitions of Online Education Terms, and an updated version of Cooperative Freedom, mytheory of online education. The remaining part is primarily based on my doctoral thesisTeaching Techniques for Computer-mediated Communication and on my experiences fromdeveloping and teaching the NKI course Online Teaching and Learning.

The second part presents my research on commercial and self-developed learning man-agement systems from two European Projects. The first article, International Web-based Edu-cation and Strategic Recommendations for Decision Makers, presents a summary of the majorfindings from the Cisaer project. The second article, European Experiences with LMS Systems,presents the results from the Web-edu project. The articles are probably also influenced bythe fact that I have headed the development of EKKO – one of the world’s first LMS sys-tems, and SESAM – the LMS system currently used by NKI Distance Education.

The third part introduces The Nordic Scene with its achievements and barriers in aninternational setting. It goes on to describe Online Education and LMS Systems in theNordic Countries. Further, Søren Nipper and Carl Holmberg, in my opinion the two best-qualified Scandinavians, have accepted my requests to write their personal contribution toelucidate the Danish and Swedish online education arena. In the article Online Education


in Denmark: A Personal Account, Søren Nipper presents an interesting analysis of Danishonline education from its introduction in 1982, via the Big Bang in 1998, to the nearfuture in which online learning will diffuse into all sectors of education and training inDanish society. Carl Holmberg’s article, On the Move towards Online Education inSweden, includes a broad discussion on how information technology in general and themany political initiatives and agencies in special have influenced the whole educationalsector in Sweden.

The final part of the book presents Potential LMS Improvements suggested by Europeansystem administrators. It also discusses important trends and future developments in interna-tional online education. The issues included are based on retrospective observations, cur-rent developments, and analyses made in the European research projects in which I haveparticipated. These include the development towards large-scale operations that leads to aneed for systems integration, a focus on cost-effectiveness, and an interest in standardiza-tion. The technology will continue to evolve, and the spread of mobile technology andbroadband networks will create new opportunities and demand for online educators.Finally, the globalization of online education is discussed.

The AnecdotesThe book includes a number of anecdotes from Nordic online education activities. Theyshould be perceived as personal observations and testimonies presented by a Norwegianeducator, devoted to the institution NKI. The selection of anecdotes and the way they arepresented should be viewed in this context.

Pioneer experiences from a student perspective are presented in Line Fjellvær: Scandi-navia’s First Mobile Student? Then a veteran teacher is portrayed in Bjørn Helgeby: OnlineTrainer of the Year. The anecdote Globalskolen: A Global Primary School presents someexperiences from online teaching of 180 Norwegian children living abroad in 58countries. Online Education Obituaries, points out some conspicuous online educationinitiatives that have proven not to be sustainable. Further, one of Scandinavia’s leadingproviders of LMS systems is described in Fronter: The Story Behind a Dawning NorwegianLMS Success. Nordic governmental initiatives to support online education are discussed inNordic Virtual Universities, and the Swedish online education policy is challenged in TheSwedish Challenges: A Provocative Statement. An in-depth description of the author’s homeinstitution is presented in NKI Fjernundervisning: Two Decades of Online Sustainability. Finally,NKI’s experiences with online education for students with disabilities are presented inAccessibility: Online Education for All.

The Web-siteThis book is published as a traditional, printed book. But it is also designed and developedwith the intention of becoming an online publication with experimental use of multimedia.More information about this is available at the book’s web-site www.studymentor.com,



www.studymentor.com

which is planned to include:

■ a pdf-version with colors and active links,■ an e-book version for PDAs,■ digitized audio content in MP3 format,■ multimedia presentations,■ links to additional online resources,■ an international online conference in November 2003 discussing issues in the book.

I N T R O D U C T I O N


ONLINE EDUCATION, TEACHING, AND LEARNING

Sustainable online education is characterized by its ability to persist when extraordinaryinternal or external funding stops. Unfortunately, it seems to be a rare phenomenon. In mostcases online education is sustainable when it generates an economic surplus or reducescosts. (Page 25)

Today’s students often have full-time jobs and families to take care of and many are reluc-tant to participate if it means relinquishing high-quality family life and job achievements.They need flexible education: education that allows them to combine job, family, and edu-cation in a manageable way. (Page 43)

Both studies show that online students have better average grades and a lower percentageof failing grades. This does not necessarily show that online courses were better than tradi-tional part-time courses, but it shows that online learning seems to work very well for stu-dents who have chosen to study online. (Page 56)

In correspondence courses, teachers are accustomed to mail carriers who deliver mail oncea day. Online teachers, however, may receive e-mail 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.This online immediacy results in student demand for swifter responses and, hence, a heavierworkload for teachers. (Page 74)

In traditional education and training allocation of resources is controlled by the “ringing ofthe bell”. (Page 73)

You are going to work harder in teaching a course online, at least the first time.... Being a“virtual” professor is a little bit like parenthood. You are “on duty” all the time, and thereseems to be no end to the demands on your time and energy. (Page 74)

Part One

Figure 2. The online teacher's workload

Online education offers students excellent opportunities for individual communication withtheir tutors. They can be contacted via e-mail 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Fewlearning environments provide such opportunities for individual access to teachers. It isobvious that online students appreciate always having a personal tutor available. It is thestudents’ dream, but it could soon become a nightmare for the tutors.



www.studymentor.com

Online Education TermsThis article presents, defines, and discusses the most pivotal online education terms that areused throughout this book. The definitions are presented and discussed in relation to eachother, rather than in their alphabetical order.

Online Education, E-learning, and M-learningOnline education: There are many terms for online education. Some of them are: virtualeducation, Internet-based education, Web-based education, and education via computer-mediated communication (CMC). The following definition of online education is based onDesmond Keegan’s (1988) definition of distance education. Hence, online education ischaracterized by:

■ the separation of teachers and learners which distinguishes it from face-to-face education■ the influence of an educational organization which distinguishes it from self-study and

private tutoring■ the use of a computer network to present or distribute some educational content■ the provision of two-way communication via a computer network so that students may

benefit from communication with each other, teachers, and staff

Sustainable online education is characterized by its ability to persist when extraordinary inter-nal or external funding stops. Unfortunately, it seems to be a rare phenomenon. In most casesonline education is sustainable when it generates an economic surplus or reduces costs.

E-learning is here defined as interactive learning in which the learning content is avail-able online and provides automatic feedback to the student’s learning activities. Onlinecommunication with real people may or may not be included, but the focus of e-learning isusually more on the learning content than on communication between learners and tutors. E-learning could be viewed as an online descendant of computer-based training (CBT) andcomputer-aided instruction (CAI).

Unfortunately, the term e-learning is often used as a more generic term and as a syn-onym for online education. Kaplan-Leiserson has developed an online e-learning glossary,which provides this definition:


© NKI Forlaget 2003, Online Education and Learning Management Systems by Morten Flate Paulsen.www.studymentor.com

www.studymentor.com

E-learning covers a wide set of applications and processes, such as Web-basedlearning, computer-based learning, virtual classrooms, and digital collaboration. Itincludes the delivery of content via Internet, intranet/extranet (LAN/WAN), audio-and videotape, satellite broadcast, interactive TV, and CD-ROM.

The term e-learning is not very precise, and it should be pointed out that learning is just one ele-ment of education. So, the term online education should cover a much broader range of servicesthan the term e-learning. One may also claim that e-learning companies often focus on coursecontent, while online education institutions cover the whole range of educational services.

Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) focuses on socially oriented theories oflearning using computer technologies to support collaborative methods of instruction.

Instructional design is characterized by a systematic and reflective process of applyingprinciples of learning and instruction to develop instructional materials, activities, informa-tion resources, and evaluation.

Mobile learning (m-learning): The term m-learning is derived from the term e-learning. It isa form of online learning that can take place anytime, anywhere with the help of a mobilecomputer device. The device must be capable of presenting learning content and providingwireless two-way communication between teacher(s) and student(s).

Online Education Support SystemsOnline education support systems are here defined as all systems that support online educa-tion. In the following, this paper discusses two alternative models for online education sup-port systems developed by the author as a part of the Web-edu project. The models are:

■ The Jigsaw model for online education support systems■ The Hub model for online education support systems

Both models show that several online education support systems should be integrated orexchange data. This need for integration increases when online education support systemsgrow from small-scale to large-scale systems. Kaplan-Leiserson touches upon the need forintegration in an attempt to define an integrated learning system:

ILS (integrated learning system): A complete software, hardware, and networksystem used for instruction. In addition to providing curriculum and lessons organ-ized by level, an ILS usually includes a number of tools such as assessments,record keeping, report writing, and user information files that help to identify learn-ing needs, monitor progress, and maintain student records.

To facilitate the increasing need for integration and exchange of data, a number of initia-tives have been undertaken to develop standards specifications. Among these initiatives arethe IMS project (www.imsproject.org) and SCORM (www.adlnet.org). Much focus has



www.imsproject.org

www.adlnet.org

been given to the specifications’ attempts to facilitate exchange of learning content, but theattempts to standardize integration between the various online education support systemscould actually be more important. This could be exemplified by the specifications IMS isdeveloping which address key problems and challenges in integration between onlineeducation support systems:

n The IMS Learning Resources Meta-data Specifications create a uniform way for describ-ing learning resources so that they can be more easily found (discovered), using meta-data aware search tools that reflect the unique needs of users in learning situations.

n The IMS Enterprise Specification is aimed at administrative applications and servicesthat need to share data about learners, courses, performance, etc., across platforms,operating systems, user interfaces, and so on.

n The IMS Content & Packaging Specification will make it easier to create reusablecontent objects that will be useful in a variety of learning systems.

n The IMS Question & Test Specification addresses the need to be able to share test itemsand other assessment tools across different systems.

n The IMS Learner Profiles Specification will look at ways to organize learner informationso that learning systems can be more responsive to the specific needs of each user.(www.imsproject.org/faqs/imsnewpage.cfm?number=6)

The Jigsaw ModelThe Jigsaw model is a simplistic model used in the web-edu project. It includes the four maincategories of online education support systems that are listed below and presented in Figure 3.

n Content Creation Tools (CCT)n Learning Management System (LMS)n Student Management System (SMS)n Accounting System (AS)

It is called the Jigsaw model to indicate that these systems should fit together to exchangedata more or less seamlessly. Figure 3 also presents some examples of actual systems andshows how the IMS specifications relate to the systems.

Figure 3. The jigsaw model for online education support systems

O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N T E R M S


IMS

Co

nten

t & P

ackagin

g S

pec.

IMS

En

terprise S

pec.

AgressoWord/FrontPage

ContentCreation

Tools(CCR)

LearningManagement

Systems(LMS)

StudentManagement

Systems(SMS)

AccountingSystems

(AS)

WebCT/ClassFronter

FS/MSTAS/LADOC

www.imsproject.org/faqs/imsnewpage.cfm?number=6

The Hub ModelThe Hub model, presented in Figure 4, is more complex than the Jigsaw model. It isincluded to show that online education support systems are becoming more and morecomplex. This is partly due to the institutions’ need to rationalize the operation to handle thegrowing number of online students and courses, and partly due to the fact that users areincreasingly expecting more sophisticated services.

The model is termed the Hub Model to indicate that the Student Management System isthe central, most important system for large-scale online education. For historical, legal, andfinancial reasons, the SMS system is the most important system for an educational institu-tion. Hence, all other systems that offer online education services should rely on the SMSsystem as the master system with which they exchange data.

Figure 4. The hub model for integration of online education support systems

The Hub model includes Customer Relation Management (CRM) systems and prospectivesystems to show the need for integration with marketing and sales related systems. It alsoincludes logistics systems to show that it could be necessary to integrate systems that handleshipment of textbooks and other physical material to distance students.

Content Creation Tools (CCT)Content creation tools are the tools that course designers and teachers use to create thecontent in online education courses. The content creation tools are used to develop learningmaterial. There are many types of content such as plain text, slides, graphics, pictures, ani-mations, simulations, assessments, audio, video etc. Typical examples of these systems areDreamWeaver, FrontPage, Word, PowerPoint, and Director. These are generic tools withfew features developed specially for online education.

In addition to the much-used generic CCT tools, there are a number of CCT tools that



are specially made for development of educational content. The most important of thesetools are termed authoring tools and assessment tools.

Authoring ToolsAuthoring tools could be regarded as a subset of content creation tools. Hall (2001)defines an authoring tool as “a software application, used by non-programmers, thatutilizes a metaphor (book, or flow chart) to create online courses”. One may say thatauthoring tools are content creation tools that are especially developed for creation ofeducational content.

Assessment ToolsContent related to assignments and assessment is especially important for educators. There-fore, there are various tools available for development of different types of assignmentssuch as for example quizzes and multiple-choice assignments.

Learning Content Management System (LCMS)Institutions that have a large amount of learning content that they want to use in severalcourses and various formats may need a Learning Content Management System. Hall(2001) explains a Learning Content Management System this way:

A learning content management system is an environment where developers cancreate, store, reuse, manage and deliver learning content from a central objectrepository, usually a database. LCMS generally work with content that is basedon a learning object model. These systems usually have good search capabilities,allowing developers to find quickly the text or media needed to build trainingcontent.

Learning Content Management Systems often strive to achieve a separation ofcontent, which is often tagged in XML, from presentation. This allows many LCMSto publish to a wide range of formats, platforms, or devices such as print, Web,and even Wireless Information Devices (WID) such as Palm and Windows CEhandhelds, all from the same source material.

An alternative definition is provided by Kaplan-Leiserson:

LCMS (learning content management system): A software application that allowstrainers and training directors to manage both the administrative and content-related functions of training. An LCMS combines the course management capa-bilities of an LMS (learning management system) with the content creation andstorage capabilities of a CMS (content management system).



Learning ObjectIt is possible to split content in a number of learning objects and reassemble them to createnew learning material or courses in the same way you play with Lego blocs. Kaplan-Leiser-son explains a learning object as:

A reusable, media-independent chunk of information used as a modular buildingblock for e-learning content. Learning objects are most effective when organized bya meta data classification system and stored in a data repository such as an LCMS.

Learning Management System (LMS)Learning Management System is a broad term that is used for a wide range of systems thatorganize and provide access to online learning services for students, teachers, and admin-istrators. These services usually include access control, provision of learning content, com-munication tools, and administration of user groups. Another term that often is used as asynonym for LMS is learning platform.

Two examples of well-known, commercial LMS systems are WebCT and Blackboard.There are however a large number of other commercial systems and systems that educa-tional institutions have developed themselves. Kaplan-Leiserson provides the followingdefinition of LMS:

LMS (learning management system): Software that automates the administration oftraining events. The LMS registers users, tracks courses in a catalog, and recordsdata from learners; it also provides reports to management. An LMS is typicallydesigned to handle courses by multiple publishers and providers. It usually doesn’tinclude its own authoring capabilities; instead, it focuses on managing coursescreated by a variety of other sources.

Hall (2001) presents this alternative definition:

A Learning Management System (LMS) is software that automates the administrationof training events. All Learning Management Systems manage the log-in of regis-tered users, manage course catalogs, record data from learners, and providereports to management.

There used to be a distinction between Learning Management Systems andmore powerful Integrated Learning Management Systems. That distinction has nowdisappeared. The term Learning Management System is now used to describe awide range of applications that track student training and may or may not includefunctions such as:

■ Authoring■ Classroom management



■ Competency management■ Knowledge management■ Certification or compliance training■ Personalization■ Mentoring■ Chat■ Discussion boards

On the one hand, LMS systems have similarities with the CMC systems (page 33) thatstarted to evolve in the 1980s to support interpersonal communication and collaborativelearning. On the other hand, LMS systems also have relationships with instructional designapproaches and the early systems for computer-based training. Therefore, it is important tounderstand that LMS systems may be built on very different pedagogical methods and theo-ries and that these underlying constraints may influence and limit the systems’ pedagogicaluse.

Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)Virtual learning environment is a term that to some extent is used instead of LMS. The twoterms have more or less the same meaning, but one may argue that VLE focusses less onthe features related to the management of learning. Bandon Hall (2001) defines a learningenvironment this way:

A Learning Environment is software designed as an all-in-one solution that can facili-tate online learning for an organization. It includes the functions of a learningmanagement system for those courses within the learning environment, but it maynot be able to track online courses that were not created within this particularlearning environment.

A learning environment is characterized by an interface that allows students toregister and take courses, staying within that environment for the duration of thecourse. The program will usually include some self-instructional portions, alongwith an academic model of a multi-week course. This model is often facilitated byan instructor, where a group can proceed on a week-to-week basis with seminarassignments. Most learning environments also include an authoring capability forcreation of additional courses for the instructor.

Learning Service Provider (LSP)There are a number of institutions that host Learning Management Systems and provide thisas a commercial service for educational institutions. These institutions could be termedLearning Service Providers (LSPs). Kaplan-Leiserson explains the LSP as a specialized Appli-cation Service Provider “offering learning management and training delivery software on ahosted or rental basis”.



Student Management System (SMS)The student management system is the core system in an educational institution. It is usedfor management of the most pivotal information about entities such as students, faculty,courses, applications, admissions, payment, exams, and grades. An effective SMS systemis crucial for all educational institutions.

Two examples of commercial SMS systems are PeopleSoft and Banner. In the Nordiccountries, universities have national systems such as STADS (Denmark), LADOK (Sweden),MSTAS (Norway), and FS (Norway).

Human Resource Information System (HRIS)Companies and corporations have employees, not students. But they have systems thathold data similar to the SMS systems with important information about their employees.These could be termed Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems or Human Resource Infor-mation Systems (HRIS). These systems will provide some of the same functionalities as stu-dent management systems.

Hall (2001) provides the following descriptions of ERP and HRIS systems:

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) is an industry term for large, often multi-modulesoftware applications that manage many facets of a company’s operations includ-ing product planning, parts purchasing, maintaining inventories, interacting withsuppliers, providing customer service, tracking orders, and managing resourcesand financials. SAP, PeopleSoft, and J.D. Edwards are some well-known ERPproviders.

Human Resource Information Systems (HRIS) are similar to ERP applications butare aimed specifically at the management of a company’s human resources.

Other names for related systems used in companies could be Knowledge ManagementSystems or Competency Management Systems. Kaplan –Leiserson defines competencymanagement as follows:

Competency management: A system used to identify skills, knowledge, and perform-ance within an organization. Enables an organization to spot gaps and introducetraining, compensation, and recruiting programs based on current or future needs.

Accounting System (AS)The accounting system is used for recording the economic transactions between theinstitution and its customers and suppliers. In an online education setting, the most importantcustomers and suppliers are the students and the teachers.

The data from the accounting systems could be used to deny system access to studentswho do not pay their tuition fees. Some institutions already accept online enrollment, online



payment, and online student credit account information. Other institutions provide onlinetutors with their updated salary account information. This functionality requires some inte-gration between the systems.

Online Teaching TermsThe key online teaching terms discussed in this article are presented in Figure 5. In thefollowing, these terms are defined and discussed in a logical sequence with related pivotalterms. The definitions are based on my thesis research (Paulsen 1998).

Figure 5. Mind map of online teaching terms

Computer-mediated communication (CMC): Transmission and reception of messages usingcomputers as input, storage, output, and routing devices. CMC includes informationretrieval, e-mail, bulletin boards, and computer conferencing. CMC also comprisessynchronous and asynchronous communication.

Information retrieval systems: CMC systems that facilitate searching and retrieval of infor-mation. Web pages and search engines have increasingly become the dominant systems.

E-mail systems (Electronic mail systems): CMC systems that facilitate exchange of messagesbetween individual users.

Bulletin board systems: CMC systems that facilitate archiving and retrieval of messagesposted by originators with write access and retrieved by users with read access.

Computer conferencing systems: Computer-mediated group communication systems thatarchive messages so that they can be read and commented on by all members of a conference.

Push or pull communication. CMC can be based on push or pull technology. In a pushsystem, the sender is in control of the distribution process. In a pull system, the receivers



need to find and retrieve the information. These are systems with different features. Bothhave their educational benefits and they may have different uses. E-mail is an example of apush system and a bulletin board is an example of a pull system.

Synchronous communication: Real-time communication such as for example online chattingand video-conferencing.

Asynchronous communication: Communication where the message is stored until thereceivers find it convenient to retrieve it. E-mail and computer conferencing are examples ofasynchronous communication.

Teaching progress: Progress can be individual or collective. Individual progress allowseach student to decide when he or she wants to start a course and how fast he or she pro-ceeds through the course. Collective progress imposes a common schedule on all students.

Online teaching system: An online system for teaching comprising learners, one or moreteachers, course content, learning resources, teaching methods, teaching techniques, andteaching devices.

Teaching method: A way of organizing people for learning. The teaching methodsincluded here are one-online, one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many.

Teaching technique: A way of accomplishing teaching objectives. According to how thetechniques prescribe student interaction with learning resources, the techniques are classi-fied as one-online techniques, one-to-one techniques, one-to-many techniques, and many-to-many techniques.

Teaching device: Tool that can assist the teaching process. This definition distinguishesbetween these four categories of CMC-based teaching devices: information retrievalsystems, e-mail, bulletin boards, and computer conferencing.

Teaching workload: The amount of time spent on teaching functions. The teaching work-load consists of the preactive and the interactive teaching workload.

■ Preactive teaching workload: Workload associated with program design and teacherpreparation, in other words, the teaching workload before the course or program starts.

■ Interactive teaching workload: Workload associated with instruction, in other words,the teaching workload after the course or program starts.

Teaching functions: The duties teachers have with regard to the teaching process. This defini-tion distinguishes between organizational functions, social functions, intellectual functions,and assessment functions.

Assessment: The general term used for measuring students’ performance on a courseagainst the aims and objectives of that course. In online education, it could be useful todistinguish between self-assessment, computer-based assessment, peer assessment, and tutorassessment. All four categories could be used for both formative and summative assessment.

■ Formative assessment: The assessment conducted as a part of the teaching: questionsand assignments set to help the student learn effectively, but not used to determine thestudent’s course results.



■ Summative assessment: The assessment intending to determine a student’s overall levelof performance on the course: questions and assignments, the grades or scores ofwhich are used in determining the student’s course result.

Facilitation technique: A manner of helping others learn. Facilitation techniques are used tocarry out teaching functions.

One-online techniques: The techniques classified as one-online are characterized byretrieval of information from online resources and the fact that a learner can perform thelearning task with little or no communication with the teacher or other students. One-onlinetechniques include:

■ Online databases are organized, searchable collections of information that can beutilized in the learning process.

■ Online publications are periodicals, journals, reports, articles, etc., that are available tolearners online or distributed to them online.

■ Online software applications are software programs that learners either can execute viathe network or download from the network.

■ Online interest groups are people who convene online to discuss and share experi-ences on a topic of common interest. Learners can join the online interest group toenhance their knowledge and comprehension of the topic.

■ Online interviews are online interactions between learners who ask focused questionsand resource people who answer them.

One-to-one techniques: The techniques classified as one-to-one are characterized by a one-to-one relationship and by individualized teaching and learning. The teaching and learningare facilitated in the communication process. So, CMC can be an effective support forthese techniques when the communication can be conveyed online. On the other hand,one may contend that some of these techniques depend so much on personal relationshipsthat face-to-face meetings may be necessary.

■ Online learning contracts are formal agreements which detail what the learners shouldlearn, how they should accomplish it, and the specific evaluation criteria that should beused in judging the completion of the learning.

■ Online apprenticeships facilitate online access to dedicated masters and peers who arewilling to share their knowledge and experience with learners through goal-orientedlearning interactions over a period of time.

■ Online internships allow learners to practice online skills under the guidance and super-vision of qualified professionals.

■ Online correspondence is a form of online education in which the learning is directed orfacilitated through personal, written communication between a tutor and individualstudents.



One-to-many techniques: The techniques defined as one-to-many are characterized bypresentation to students by one or more individual experts or by interacting experts. Thelearners are usually not invited to take active part in the interaction, so the communication istypically conducted in a conference or bulletin board system where students primarily haveaccess to read. The techniques included are lectures, symposiums, and skits.

■ Online lectures are organized, in-depth, online presentations that are designed forlearning and facilitate online questions from learners and answers from the lecturer.

■ Online symposiums are series of presentations given by a number of experts followedby questions from the learners and answers from the experts. The teacher can functionas a moderator of the symposium.

■ Online skits are prepared enactments in which real or imaginary online people, suchas teachers and their alter egos, demonstrate or discuss certain issues or concepts.

Many-to-many techniques: A characteristic of the techniques presented as many-to-manytechniques is that all participants have the opportunity to take part in the interaction. Thedegree of teacher involvement can however vary considerably. Such interaction is the mostcommon application of educational CMC and it can be facilitated in open or closedcomputer conferences. The techniques discussed are debate, simulation, role-play, casestudy, discussion groups, transcript-based assignments, brainstorming, delphi technique,nominal group technique, forum, project group, and student presentation.

■ Online debates are structured discussions in which the learners argue two or more sidesof an important issue to clarify differences and related reasoning within a given set ofrules and time schedule.

■ Online simulations are online imitations of real processes that are designed to helpexperience and understand the dynamics of a complex process.

■ Online role-plays are enactments of situations in which learners act out scenes likeactors in a play. A teacher can use structured role-plays that are based on case studiesor spontaneous role-plays that are based on momentary experiences.

■ Online case studies are descriptions of real situations that are designed to help thelearners understand and practice problem-solving and decision-making procedures insituations that are complex enough to warrant analysis and online discussion.

■ Online discussion groups are places where a group of learners exchange ideas on agiven topic.

■ Transcript-based assignments utilize the ability to provide transcripts of online interactionthat could be used to promote learner reflection. This could be done by asking thelearners to reflect on their overall personal contributions during the course, or to sum-marize all previous contributions on a specific topic, or to rewrite an early statement todemonstrate that additional learning has taken place during the course.



■ Online brainstorming sessions are used primarily to generate a pool of ideas on agiven topic or to help determine the exact nature of content to be studied. Theapproach encourages learners to think creatively and to expand upon ideas of otherlearners.

■ Online delphi is a technique to obtain the most reliable consensus of opinion of agroup of experts using a series of intensive questionnaires interspersed with controlledopinion feedback.

■ Nominal group technique is based on individual generation and ranking of ideas,followed by a public presentation of the priority ranked list of ideas, a discussion of thepresented ideas, and vote for the final ranking.

■ Online forums provide teachers and learners with a space where they can convene toraise and discuss issues from the course, make comments, offer information, or askquestions. The teacher usually functions as a moderator.

■ Online projects are major tasks, initially loosely defined, which have composite object-ives and are limited in time and scope. Online projects require online communicationbetween the learners in the project groups and access to a variety of online resources.

■ Student presentation is a technique in which learners are asked to present their work toother learners via e-mail, computer conferences, Web pages, etc. Feedback from otherstudents is not necessarily required.

Additional GlossariesThe following glossaries are recommended for further information:

■ The glossary in the elearningeuropa portal (http://elearningeuropa.info).■ Glossaries of Learning Technologies Terms (http://olt-bta.hrdc-

drhc.gc.ca/resources/glossariesx.html) provides links to a number of online glossariesof learning technologies.

■ The list of e-learning Glossaries provided by the e-learning Centre (www.e-learningcentre.co.uk/eclipse/Resources/glossaries.htm).

■ The Global Distance EducationNet(http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/glossary.html) provides a glossary of distanceeducation terms.

■ WhatIs (www.whatis.com) provides definitions for thousands of the most current IT-related words.

■ Glossaries of Collaborative Technologies Center(www.edb.utexas.edu/resta/itesm2002/glossary.html) is provided by The University ofTexas at Austin.



http://elearningeuropa.info

http://olt-bta.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/resources/glossariesx.html

http://olt-bta.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/resources/glossariesx.html

www.e-learningcentre.co.uk/eclipse/Resources/glossaries.htm

www.edb.utexas.edu/resta/itesm2002/glossary.html

http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/glossary.html

www.whatis.com

ReferencesHall, B. 2001. New Technology Definitions.(www.brandonhall.com/public/glossary/index.htm)

Kaplan-Leiserson, E. E-Learning Glossary. (www.learningcircuits.org/glossary.html)

Keegan, D. 1988. On defining distance education. In Distance Education: InternationalPerspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holmberg, 6-33. London/New York:Routledge.

Paulsen, M. F. 1998. Teaching Techniques for Computer-mediated Communication.Ann Arbor, Mi: UMI Dissertation Services.



www.brandonhall.com/public/glossary/index.htm

www.learningcircuits.org/glossary.html

Cooperative Freedom: An Online Education TheoryThis article1 presents a distance education theory based on existing theoretical perspectivesand discusses how it applies to online education. Focusing on the tension betweenindividual independence and collective cooperation within the dimensions of time, space,pace, medium, access, and content within distance education contexts, the theory of coop-erative freedom argues that online education can foster both freedom for the individual andgroup cooperation.

Distance Education and CMCIn an analysis of existing theories of distance education, Keegan (1988a, 30) concludedthat six major elements define a distance education program:

■ The separation of teacher and learner, which distinguishes it from face-to-face learning;■ The influence of an educational organization, which distinguishes it from private study;■ The use of technical media, usually print, to unite teacher and learner and carry the

educational content;■ The provision of two-way communication so that the student may benefit from or even

initiate dialogue;■ The possibility of occasional meetings for both didactic and socialization purposes; and■ The participation in an industrialized form of education which, if accepted, contains the

genus of radical separation of distance education from other forms.

The implications of introducing CMC in distance education are discussed for each of theseelements by Mason and Kaye (1990). They conclude that the use of CMC has three majorimplications for distance education:



1 The first version of the theory was published in my monograph From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Univer-sities: Distance Education, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online Education (Paulsen 1992).The article was a first attempt to develop a theory of distance education attuned specifically to com-puter-mediated communication (CMC) and online education. In this revised and updated version ofthe article, there is less emphasis on CMC and more focus on large-scale online education.

www.studymentor.com

■ The breaking down of conceptual distinctions between distance education and place-based education;

■ The changing of traditional roles of faculty, administrative and support staff, andadjunct tutors; and

■ The provision of an opportunity, which never existed before, to create a network ofscholars, “space” for collective thinking, and access to peers for socializing andserendipitous exchange.

These implications are so important that it is necessary to re-evaluate traditional distanceeducation theories and discuss how they attune to online education.

Distance Education TheoriesMany theoretical perspectives on distance education have been presented during the lastfew decades. Keegan (1988b) identifies these three theoretical positions:

■ Theories of autonomy and independence,■ Theories of industrialization, and■ Theories of interaction and communication.

One representative theory in each position follows and the implication of the theory foronline education is discussed.

Theories of autonomy and independence. Moore’s inductive analysis of descriptions of two thousand instructional programs led to the development of a theory on dialogue,structure, and autonomy (Moore 1991). Moore perceives dialogue as interactionbetween learner and instructor, structure as certain characteristics of course design, andautonomy as learner independence. He argues that distance education organizationsshould ideally give students maximum independence with regard to choice of aims,objectives, study methods, and learning activities; study pace and progression; andevaluation (Moore 1983).

In his paper, Moore (1991) encourages analysis of the effects computer conferencinghas on dialogue, structure, and autonomy. First, the introduction of group communicationmeans that dialogue is no longer mere communication between learner and instructor.Second, relatively few courses have been designed for computer conferencing; the majorityhave adapted their structure from existing distance education courses or face-to-facecourses. Third, computer conferencing is devised for group activity, so too much autonomyis not within its scope. However, the goal must be to devise systems that support individualfreedom as well as cooperative group activity.

Theories of industrialization. Peters’ (1988) applications of industrial theory led him toconclude that the structure of distance teaching is determined to a considerable degree bythe principles of industrialization, particularly by those of rationalization, division of labor,and mass production; the teaching process is gradually restructured through increasing



mechanization and mass production. These changes account for the emergence of thefollowing structural propositions:

■ The development of distance study courses is just as important as the preparatory worktaking place prior to the production process.

■ The effectiveness of the teaching process is particularly dependent on planning andorganization.

■ Courses must be formalized and expectations from students standardized.■ The teaching process is largely objectified.■ The functions of academics teaching at a distance have changed considerably vis-à-vis

university teachers in conventional teaching.■ Distance study can only be economical with a concentration of the available resources

and a centralized administration. (Peters 1988, 110)

Initially, the theory of industrialization did not seem to apply to computer conferencing.Bates (1991) stated:

Third generation technologies (computer conferencing) are particularly valuablewhere relatively small numbers of students are concerned, since they avoid thehigh fixed production costs of the industrial model, but they do not however bringthe economies of scale of the industrial model, unless the opportunities for interac-tion for an individual student are dramatically curtailed. (p. 13)

But later we have seen that online education could be applied to mass education, and it isobvious that at least content development, student support services, and student manage-ment could benefit from elements of industrialization.

Theories of interaction and communication. In his theory of guided didactic conversation,Holmberg (1988) views the distance-study course and its non-contiguous communicationstyle as instruments of a “conversation-like interaction between the student on the one handand the tutor counselor of the supporting organization administering the study on the other”(p. 115). Constant interaction (conversation) between the supporting organization (authors,tutors, counselors) is both simulated and real: simulated through the students’ interactionwith the pre-produced course materials and real through written and/or telephone interac-tion with their tutors and counselors.

Holmberg’s theory is developed with a focus on correspondence courses and one-to-onecommunication. Consequently, it does not give much consideration to group communication.However, the theory can be developed further to include group facilitation, and a number ofauthors have recommended related facilitation techniques for online education courses.

Initially, little pre-produced course material was developed just for online education.Much of the material is still adapted directly from existing face-to-face or correspondencecourses. Even though some specialize on developing e-learning content, more work mustbe done in the future to produce tailor-made material for online courses. An important

C O O P E R AT I V E F R E E D O M : A N O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N T H E O RY


feature of such material would be the potential for asynchronous group interaction. On theother hand, experience has shown that computer conferencing as currently implementedcan be an excellent medium for facilitating a guided didactic conversation between thestudents, the tutors, and the supporting organization.

The Theory of Cooperative FreedomThe theory of cooperative freedom can be classified as a theory of autonomy and inde-pendence, as described earlier in this article. It is influenced by Knowles’s (1970) theory ofandragogy, which asserts that adult learners perceive themselves as self-directing humanbeings and define themselves in terms of their personal achievements and experiences. Thetheory of cooperative freedom perceives both adult and juvenile distance learners as moti-vated, self-directing students with a desire to control their learning outcomes. Further, thetheory applies to all three categories of Houle’s (1961) student motivational orientations:goal oriented, activity oriented, and learning oriented.

McCreary (1990, 120) indicates how each of Houle’s categories will relate to com-puter conferencing systems. Goal-oriented participants will perceive CMC as a way to“keep the edge” and to use state-of-the-art technology to achieve their goals. Activity-oriented students cannot resist the always-available online activity. Finally, knowledge-oriented people may be motivated by access to all the up-to-date information andknowledgeable people that CMC provides.

The theory of cooperative freedom suggests that, independently of motivationalorientation; distance students need cooperation as well as individual freedom.

Cooperation. Houle (1984) states that education is a cooperative rather than an operativeart: it implies voluntary interaction among individuals during learning. Even solitary studentsguiding their own programs without the help of an instructor seek help and encouragementfrom others. In a social setting, those who take part in an educational activity should havesome sense of collaboration in both planning and implementation:

At one extreme, this sharing is so complete that it requires a group to decideeverything that it does together. At the other extreme, the sharing may be implicitin the teaching-learning situation, as when many people flock to hear a lecturer.Those who attend vote with their feet, as the saying goes, and one cannot assumefrom their physical passivity and silence as they sit in the auditorium that they arenot cooperating fully in their instruction. (Houle 1984, 45)

Cooperation can be hard to achieve in distance education. A major problem for many studentsis the loneliness that results from limited access to student peers; the urge for individual free-dom may intensify the problem. However, new group communication technologies such asaudio conferencing, video conferencing, and computer conferencing have been devised tofacilitate cooperation at a distance. Many online educators are studying computer supported



collaborative learning. In a distance education setting, collaboration is even harder toachieve than cooperation. Therefore the term cooperation is deliberately chosen in this theory.

Freedom. The theory of cooperative freedom is concerned with freedom from restraintsrather than freedom from oppression. It professes that students should have a high level offreedom to choose rather than be restrained by a rigid distance education program. Itstates that freedom is crucial in distance education. For many people, the need for continu-ing education and lifelong learning is increasing. Today’s students, however, often have full-time jobs and families to take care of and many are reluctant to participate if it means relin-quishing high-quality family life and job achievements. They need flexible education:education that allows them to combine job, family, and education in a manageable way.

Freedom is a complex construct. It has many facets and features. The theory of cooperativefreedom suggests that the facets of special importance to distance education are time, space,pace, medium, access, and content. None of these can be described as dichotomous; eachmust be perceived as a continuum from complete individual freedom to total dependence ondecisions made by others. This article describes important features of these six facets of free-dom that program planners should consider when they develop online education programs.The facets are presented and discussed as the Hexagon of Cooperative Freedom (Figure 6).

Cooperative freedom is a fabricated term. At first sight, it seems self-contradictory. “Coop-erative” indicates group interaction and interpersonal dependency, though “freedom” impliesindividual autonomy. Yet, if we could develop a distance education system that combinesfreedom for the individual with group cooperation, we would attain a distance educationsystem based on cooperative freedom. This article argues that such a system can be madepossible by online education and discusses its potential strengths and weaknesses.

Figure 6. The hexagon of cooperative freedom



Freedom of time. In distance education, one must distinguish between synchronous andasynchronous communication. Both have distinct features and strengths, and they can beapplied individually or in a combination. In asynchronous communication, the message isstored in the communication medium until the receivers find it convenient to retrieve it.Synchronous communication, on the other hand, is inflexible, but allows people to commu-nicate in real time, as they do face-to-face or on the telephone. Scheduling of synchronouscommunication varies in flexibility. A telephone conversation can be initiated without anyprior schedule, but a videoconference must usually be scheduled months in advance.

A high level of freedom allows students to communicate whenever it is convenient forthem. Students may prefer to study during the weekends, after their children have gone tobed, during regular work hours, or whenever they have time available. In addition, humanresponse time and system delays should be minimal.

Ideally, online education is completely independent of time. It is available 24 hours aday, 365 days a year. It gives instantaneous access to information whenever it is con-venient for the user and there is no need to synchronize the operation among communi-cation partners. Many systems provide synchronous communication as well.

Freedom of space. The first of Keegan’s major elements for defining distance education dealtwith the separation of teacher and learner. This separation does not necessarily imply muchfreedom of space. Many distance education programs, for instance those taught by videoconferencing, may require students to attend classes at fixed locations. Keegan concludesthat distance education may include occasional face-to-face meetings; nevertheless, toomany institutions require online students to physically attend exams in a classroom.

Distance education programs with a high level of freedom let students choose wherethey want to study. Some may want to meet in a classroom with their peers while othersprefer to study at home, at work, or wherever a busy life situates them.

Online education can be accessed worldwide, wherever there is an Internet connection.For some people and regions, communication costs though are a limiting factor. Computerstend to be smaller and more mobile, but still textbooks are more convenient to use on manylocations.

Freedom of pace. Pacing can be individual or collective. It implies meeting deadlines forstarting a course, for examinations, and for assignments. Deadlines, however, can be flexi-ble or rigid. They are flexible when students can set the deadlines, or select one of severaldeadlines. One example of extreme pacing flexibility is seen in correspondence courses thatallow individual students to start and finish at any time. A more moderately flexible exampleis a course with multiple starting dates that allow students to enroll at a convenient time.Shale (1987, 32) asserts that “...standardized treatments (of pacing) could be applied to allstudents on an individual basis.” He also suggests possible justifications for rigid pacing:

1. To make the administration of a distance-learning system tractable,2. To express a commitment to a collectivist philosophy,



3. To guarantee the credibility of examinations,4. To enhance student motivation through group activity, and5. To avoid procrastination. (Shale 1987)

Based on a study of students who took the same course either by correspondence oronline, Rekkedal concludes that the correspondence students consider individual pacing toconstitute a large advantage of correspondence studies, while the online students givemore varied viewpoints (Rekkedal 1990, 91).

A high level of freedom allows students to choose the pacing they prefer. If they resentrigid pacing, they should be allowed to spend the time they require to complete a course.Other people would like to choose when to start a course and how fast to progress in it.

Wells (1992) identifies three pacing techniques available with CMC. The first is groupassignments that urge coherent pacing within groups. The second is gating, a techniquethat denies students access to information before they have completed all prerequisiteassignments. The third technique is limited time access to services such as conferences,databases, and guest speakers.

The previous discussion shows that online courses can be paced to a greater or lesserextent. Meaningful group communications, perhaps computer conferencing’s majoradvantage, may, however, be a pedagogical challenge to surmount in an unpaced mode.

Freedom of medium. Nipper (1989) argues that there are three generations of distanceeducation. The first generation uses correspondence teaching based on printed and writtenmaterial. The second is based on broadcast media, such as television and radio, as wellas on distribution of video- and audiocassettes. The third generation uses computer con-ferencing systems. Each generation utilizes the media devised in earlier generations.

Programs with a high level of freedom provide students with access to several media orsources of information: print, video, face-to-face meetings, computer conferencing, etc. Thisapproach will support different learning styles and prevent exclusion of students lackingaccess to or knowledge of high technology media. Online education can easily andfavorably be supplemented by or integrated with textbooks, audio and video-conferences,computer-aided instruction, etc.

Freedom of access. This point is related to the terms “open learning” and “open education.”Charles A. Wedemeyer explains the origin of the term open learning:

This term came into use in 1969 when the British Open University was founded.It...means providing part-time learning opportunities for learners at a distance,who operate with a degree of autonomy and self-direction, but with open medi-ated access to learning without conventional prerequisites for acceptance oraccreditation. (Wedemeyer 1981, xxvi)



Escotet (cited in Keegan 1986) characterizes open education as less restricted, exclusive,and privileged than traditional education; as flexibly paced; as encouraging new relation-ships between professors and students; and as willing to credit the value of students’ lifeexperiences.

In online education, there is no need to restrict enrollment because of physical limitationssuch as the number of available seats in a classroom. A flexible system can enroll all stu-dents who want to study. So, programs that aspire to a high level of freedom must eliminatediscrimination on the basis of social class, entry qualifications, gender, age, ethnicity, oroccupation. As discussed in Accessibility: Online Education for All (page 312), online educa-tion should also be made available to people with disabilities. Programs should not askstudents to document prior education; rather, students should decide for themselves whetherthey are capable of pursuing the course of study. Access should be available to studentswith limited monetary resources, and to those with no access to or limited knowledge ofdistance education technology. A major concern for online education is its image as anexclusive medium closed to prospective students lacking access to necessary equipment orknowledge about how to use it. Fortunately, this problem is alleviated year by year as morepeople learn to use computers at home, school, or work.

Freedom of content. This facet reflects the theories of autonomy and independence discussedearlier in this article. One early example of such freedom was provided by the ElectronicUniversity Network, which in 1988 promoted transfer of credits among all its membercolleges.

A high level of freedom allows students to choose among a range of courses and totransfer credits between programs and universities. The ongoing international harmoniza-tion of educational policies supports this freedom on the global level. On the institutionallevel, freedom of content implies opportunities for individual studies, learning contracts,internships, etc.

Online education has the potential to further increase inter-college collaboration. Severalprograms, perhaps from different colleges, could favorably be offered through a commonLMS system. It is to be hoped that such collaboration and systems will provide students withadditional course options and easier transfer of credits. It could imply a free flow of virtualmobile students in Europe and across the globe.

Discussion of Freedom, Flexibility andCooperationFreedom is a multi-dimensional construct. Each dimension should be regarded as continu-ous rather than dichotomous, as relative, not absolute. All distance education programs willhave some freedom in each dimension. There are no quick, definite, or ready-madeanswers to the question of how much freedom an online education program should pro-vide. Nevertheless, program planners who address this question are likely to provide betteronline programs.



In the book Flexible Learning in a Digital World, Collis and Moonen (2001, 16) presentseveral factors that constrain learning flexibility. They state that flexibility could be unmanage-able, not acceptable, not affordable, and not realistic. But it is noteworthy to realize thatinstitutions that provide flexible online courses and programs will reach a larger potentialmarket. A local face-to-face course with yearly enrollment covers, for example, a muchsmaller market than an online course with continuous enrollment as illustrated in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Potential market as a result of flexibility in time and space

Figure 8 also shows that a traditional university that enrolls students once a year in a limitedgeographical area, reaches a smaller potential market than a distance education institutionthat offers continuous enrollment of students around the country. But in this example, the tra-ditional college is more flexible than the distance education institution with regard to con-tent and medium.

Figure 8. Flexibility and potential market coverage



A high level of student freedom, assumed in this article to be a desirable goal of coursedesign, is extremely difficult to achieve. Scarce resources and rigid educational regulationsoften inhibit flexible distance education. LMS systems and e-learning standards could alsoresult in reduced flexibility. Yet, the hexagon of cooperative freedom can serve as a guidefor implementation of distance education.

One may say that one student’s freedom ends where another’s begins, that one student’sfreedom to act infringes on the freedom of another. As Burge (1991) points out in relation tocomputer conferencing, “One person’s time flexibility is another’s time delay.” The truth of thisstatement is hard to refute, but reducing dependence on individual students and instructorscould mitigate such negative consequences. Co-teaching, for instance, could reduce theresponse time since several teachers can access the system more often than one teacher can.

The pedagogical challenges with regard to accommodating individual freedom withcooperative learning are evident. How can we facilitate cooperative learning in courseswith individual pacing? How can senior students who are in the final stage of a coursebenefit from collaboration with junior students who have just enrolled on the course? It is ofcourse possible to create learning environments that allow senior students to mentor juniorstudents for mutual learning, and to develop assignments that utilize the variation in curricularknowledge. But these pedagogical challenges need much more attention in the future.

Individual freedom is hard to combine with an industrialized model of education andcan hardly compete in terms of cost-effectiveness with industrialized mass education. Thereis a general trend, however, toward customized mass production. A buyer of a new cartoday may choose among several accessory options. Why, then, should not large-scale,online education aim for individual flexibility?

ConclusionFuture adult students will seek individual flexibility and freedom. At the same time, manyneed or prefer group collaboration and social unity. These aims are difficult to combine,but online education, when integrated with other media, can be the means of joiningindividual freedom and collective unity into truly flexible, cooperative distance educationprograms.

ReferencesBates, T. 1991. Third generation distance education: The challenge of new technology.Research in Distance Education 3(2):10-15.

Burge, E. J. 1991. Appreciation and description: Themes for germinal research. A paperpresented at The Second American Symposium on Research in Distance Education, May22-24, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.

Collis, B. and J. Moonen. 2001. Flexible Learning in a Digital World. Experiences andExpectations. London: Kogan Page.

Holmberg, B. 1988. Guided didactic conversation in distance education. In Distance



Education: International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holmberg, 114-22. London/New York: Croom Helm/St. Martins Press.

Houle, C. O. 1961. The Inquiring Mind. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

Houle, C. O. 1984. The design of education. In Selected Writings on Philosophy andAdult Education, ed. S. B. Merriam, 41-50. Malibar, Florida: Krieger.

Keegan, D. 1986. The Foundations of Distance Education. London: Croom Helm.

Keegan, D. 1988a. Theories of distance education. In Distance Education: InternationalPerspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holmberg,63-67. London: Routledge.

Keegan, D. 1988b. On defining distance education. In Distance Education: InternationalPerspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holmberg,6-33. London: Routledge.

Knowles, M. 1970. The Modern Practice of Adult Education. New York: Association Press.

McCreary, E. K 1990. Three behavioral models for computer-mediated communication.In Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment, ed. L. Harasim, 117-30. NewYork: Praeger.

Mason, R. and T. Kaye. 1990. Toward a new paradigm for distance education. In OnlineEducation: Perspectives on a New Environment, ed. L. Harasim,15-38. New York:Praeger.

Moore, M. G. 1983. On a theory of independent study. In Distance Education: Interna-tional Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holmberg. London/New York:Croom Helm/St. Martin’s Press.

Moore, M. G. 1991. Theory of distance education. Paper presented at The SecondAmerican Symposium on Research in Distance Education, May 22-24,The PennsylvaniaState University, University Park, PA.

Nipper, S. 1989. Third generation distance learning and computer conferencing. InMindweave: Communication, Computers and Distance Education, eds. R. Mason andA. Kaye, 63-73. Oxford: Pergamon Press. (www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap5.html)

Paulsen, M. F. 1992. From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities: Distance Education,Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online Education. University Park: The AmericanCenter for the Study of Distance Education.

Paulsen, M. F. 1992. The electronic university: computer conferencing in mass education.In From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities: Distance Education, Computer-MediatedCommunication, and Online Education, M. F. Paulsen, 46-55. University Park: TheAmerican Center for the Study of Distance Education.

Peters, O. 1988. Distance teaching and industrial production: A comparative interpretationin outline. In Distance Education: International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan,and B. Holmberg, 95-111. London/New York: Croom Helm/St. Martin’s Press.

Rekkedal, T. 1990. Recruitment and study barriers in the electronic college. In The Elec-tronic College. Selected Articles From the EKKO Project, eds. M. F. Paulsen and T.Rekkedal, 79-105. Oslo: NKI Forlaget.

Shale, D. G. 1987. Pacing in distance education. The American Journal of DistanceEducation 1(2):21-33.



www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap5.html

Wedemeyer, C. A. 1981. Learning at the Back Door. Wisconsin: The University ofWisconsin Press.

Wells, R. 1992. Computer-Mediated Communication for Distance Education: An Inter-national Review of Design, Teaching, and Institutional Issues. University Park: The AmericanCenter for the Study of Distance Education.



Anecdote 1. Line Fjellvær:Scandinavia’s First MobileStudent?

In the spring of 2002, Line Fjellvær was among the threefirst students to utilize NKI’s experimental services formobile education. So far, she is pleased with the servicesand emphasizes that they make online courses moreflexible. Like many other adult students, Line is a verybusy person. She is the Director of Studies for the Inter-national Centre for Hydropower in Trondheim, and herwork requires frequent traveling and field services. She isalso a mother of three active children, age 6-9.

“I have little spare time for studying, she says. I haveto do it in between – when I have some availablemoments. And then, I’m not always near my PC.”

Line had no experience of online education beforeshe enrolled on the Specialization Program in International Online Education (SPICE). Shechose the SPICE program because her employer wanted to develop online courses both asseparate courses and as a supplement to traditional courses. When she had finished theintroductory course, she was asked to become an m-learning guinea pig in the SPICE 603:Online teaching and learning course. Since then, she has been a mobile student using a PDAwith a mobile phone connection to the Internet. Now, she is contemplating using her SPICEcourses as a part of a master’s degree in pedagogy and information technology from theDanish Pedagogical University.

The course was NKI’s contribution as a partner in the European-funded m-learning proj-ect (http://learning.ericsson.net/leonardo/index.html), headed by the Ericsson Company.Through the project, NKI provides three students and the teacher – Morten Flate Paulsen –with PDAs, Ericsson mobile phones, and free access to the Internet. Since very few poten-tial students had access to such mobile equipment, and since it was more expensive thanthe course tuition, only three mobile students took part in the experiment. Ordinary students,without mobile equipment, also took part in the course. So, all mobile services wereoffered as optional supplements to the ordinary online course services.

Line is very pleased with the opportunity to use her PDA to study when she is traveling.She has downloaded all course readings to her PDA as e-book files in Microsoft Readerformat. She can also use it to communicate with her tutor and peer students via e-mail.When she traveled to Tanzania, she experienced that she could use the PDA to write worddocuments and e-mail them with her mobile equipment. She admits, though, that her equip-ment has caused several problems:

“I was able to connect to the Internet via my mobile phone in Tanzania, but it was trouble-


http://learning.ericsson.net/leonardo/index.html

some to use as the connection was slow and often it just wouldn’t connect. I tried usingdifferent phone numbers and connections through the university, Frisurf, and Tele2. For noapparent reason, only one would work. For a period I was “out of business”, since the PDAlost battery power and, as a consequence of that, all the data. Then I couldn’t get it to workwith the phone. It was very frustrating. I fancy getting a PDA in which the phone is incor-porated.”

When she is at work or at home, she uses her ordinary PC for her online studies. Butshe has found the PDA to be a useful supplement when she would like to study in an air-plane, in a hotel room, or during shorter breaks in her everyday life. “The PDA is so smallthat I can always take it with me,” she says. “I cannot do that with my laptop.”

“I have used the PDA to copy text of special interest from the readings into Word docu-ments that I use for repetition and reflection. This is actually the function I have used most. Itis not difficult to do, and it makes revising, note taking, and writing assignments easier.”

“I find MS Reader very useful,” she states. “When traveling, it is great that all my coursereadings are contained in the tiny PDA. There are always occasions where I find that Ihave time to study - at the airport when the plane is delayed or on the train to work in themorning. Without the PDA it is not possible, since I can’t carry all my textbooks and papersin print. Since I take the PDA with me, I now have the opportunity to read, write and studyat unplanned times and whenever there is an opportunity.”

”In MS Reader I have used bookmarks, high-lights, notes, text copying, and searching. All fea-tures have been useful. When I read, I find that Ilearn more when I write comments or highlightimportant points. I have also found it very useful forwriting assignments. Using the notes function, I haveadded comments and experiences to remember touse them in the assignment later. For references, MSReader makes it easier to copy the exact referencewhich is time-saving. I have used the bookmarkfunction to be able to go back to text I want to readagain and to find text I believe is important or willbe useful for an assignment. The search function isespecially useful for larger documents as well as forassignment. When for example I wanted to learnmore about interview techniques, I could easilysearch for this in the entire course readings.”

Finally, Line believes that mobile equipment could be useful at home as well. There,she would like to have wireless, broadband access to the Internet so that she easily andinexpensively could move around with an online tablet PC. This, she says, would redefinethe meaning of the term mobile homes.


Online Teaching andLearning

AbstractThis article presents seven distinct features of online teaching. Then it introduces thecharacteristics of online learners and their special needs from the perspectives of distanceeducation, adult education, and online education. It discusses some evidence showing thatonline students have positive experiences with and attitudes toward online education. Italso presents some research on the learners’ persistence, results, and grades.

There are four online teaching methods: one-online, one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many. The teaching methods correspond with four categories of online teaching devices:information retrieval systems, e-mail systems, bulletin board systems, and computer confer-encing systems. For each method, a number of online teaching techniques are introduced.

The article discusses teaching style, moderation and facilitation. Teaching style is based onphilosophical orientation and theories of education. Facilitation techniques are ways of help-ing others learn. Teachers perform moderation when they preside over a discussion group ora class forum. The article looks at an online teacher’s organizational, social, intellectual, andassessment functions. Further, it presents a number of recommended facilitation techniques.

It discusses individual assignments and group assignments. It also discusses the conse-quences of presenting student work to an individual tutor or to a larger audience. Thediscussion on assessment includes formative and summative assessment, self-assessment,computer assessment, tutor assessment, and peer assessment. Some strategies are sug-gested to organize and improve online assessment.

The article identifies some incentives and barriers to online teaching. It further discussesthe preactive and interactive workload associated with the four online teaching methods.In any discussion of teaching workload, it is important to identify and refine teaching tech-niques, with a view to decreasing the teaching workload per student. So, in conclusion, anumber of strategies to reduce the teacher workload are suggested.

Seven Interesting Online TeachingOpportunitiesOnline teaching differs from traditional teaching in several ways. The most important onlineeducation constraint is the fact that interpersonal communication usually is conducted via a



www.studymentor.com



keyboard. It is therefore difficult to convey audiovisual communication etc. However asshown in List 1, online education provides several interesting teaching opportunities:

List 1. Seven interesting online teaching opportunities

These features provide teaching opportunities that can rarely be achieved in other educa-tional environments. They could probably add a new dimension to familiar teaching tech-niques and also contribute to the development of a number of new, innovative teachingtechniques.

Student Needs and CharacteristicsDiscussing the learner’s perspective, Mason and Kaye (1990, 25) argued that “...growthtoward autonomy and self directedness in learning can be radically enhanced byCMC....” On the other hand, Houle (1984) stated that education is a cooperative ratherthan an operative art. Cooperation can be hard to achieve in distance education. Amajor problem for many students is the loneliness that results from limited access to studentpeers. The urge for individual freedom, start-up flexibility, and progress flexibility mayintensify the problem. However, group communication technologies such as audio con-ferencing, video conferencing, and computer conferencing have been devised to facilitatecooperation at a distance.

Stilborne and Williams (1996) have written the paper Meeting the Needs of AdultLearners in Developing Courses for the Internet. They discuss aspects of adult learning thatshould be taken into consideration in the development of online courses. Based on adultlearning theory, they claim that:

■ adults must want to learn,■ adults will learn only what they feel they need to learn,■ adults learn by comparing past experience with new experience,

1. They can conveniently utilize an overwhelming amount of online resources.2. They can facilitate collaborative learning independent of time and space.3. They can provide time to prepare and reflect on comments and contributions.4. They can facilitate on-demand access to learning activities that continue for an

extended time period.5. They can provide unique opportunities to utilize discourse transcripts for analyti-

cal and reflective assignments.6. They can conveniently utilize computer-aided instruction.7. They can offer multimedia elements in presentations and demonstrations. How-

ever, for interaction among people, they still primarily rely on written communi-cation with the inherent keyboard limitations.

■ adults need immediate feedback concerning their progress,■ adults want their learning to be practical,■ adults try to avoid failure,■ adults do not all learn the same way.

All these aspects of adult education have implications for online education. Stilborne andWilliams discuss these implications with emphasis on course design. In an introduction to itsonline classes in Spring 99, Howard Community College states:

Taking an online class has many advantages, including increased flexibility incompleting homework assignments, the ability to communicate with your class-mates and your instructor from the convenience of your own home or workplace,and enhanced access to written materials ranging from discipline-specific internetresources to saved chats and instructor’s class announcements. However, anonline class is not for everyone. For instance, if you need the discipline of meetingon campus several times a week and you enjoy the in-person interaction betweenother students and your instructor, you are more likely to succeed in a regularclass... (www.howardcc.edu/online/requir_courseofferings.htm)

Howard Community College further claims that a successful online learner:

■ is self-motivated (does not need a lot of direction, motivation from a teacher)■ is self-disciplined (can budget time wisely and does not procrastinate often)■ enjoys the challenge of learning on her/his own (likes to read and learn)■ takes charge of her/his own learning (willing to ask questions and get help when

necessary)■ communicates well in writing■ may need a flexible schedule but understands that flexibility does NOT mean the

course will be easy. (www.howardcc.edu/online/requir_courseofferings.htm)

Student Experiences and AttitudesTorstein Rekkedal’s (1999) report Courses on the WWW – Student Experiences and AttitudesToward WWW Courses – II presents the results of two surveys among students at the NKIInternet College. Rekkedal concludes that a large majority of the students in both surveysagree that:

■ it is possible to achieve excellence in courses that are taught on the WWW■ enrollment was facilitated because the course was on the WWW■ they would enroll again on a WWW based course■ they would encourage a colleague or friend to enroll on a WWW based course

O N L I N E T E A C H I N G A N D L E A R N I N G


www.howardcc.edu/online/requir_courseofferings.htm

www.howardcc.edu/online/requir_courseofferings.htm

Results, Grades, and PersistenceMuch work has been done on comparing the achievements of students in different learningenvironments. Thomas L. Russel has compiled a bibliography(http://teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/) of hundreds of studies that show thatthere is no significant difference in learning achievements no matter what media you use forlearning. Russell calls this The No Significant Difference Phenomenon. If this is correct, onemight conclude that online learning can be as good as any other form of learning.

Bill Orr has compiled some references to articles (http://teleeducation.nb.ca/content/articles/english/A-Significant-Difference.html) that show the efficacy of new interactivemedia during recent years and newer studies. Similarly, it is not difficult to find assertionsthat online students do better than other students. One example was found at http://teleeducation.nb.ca/content/media/0297/betteronline.html:

EXPERIMENT SHOWS STUDENTS DO BETTER ONLINEA sociology professor at California State University at Northridge conducted hisown experiment to test online learning, randomly dividing his statistics class inhalf, and teaching one half by lecture and the other half by Web assignments,online discussion groups and e-mail. The students who’d been banned from thephysical classroom scored an average of 20% higher than those who’d attendedin-person. “The motivation for doing this was to provide some hard, experimentalevidence that didn’t seem to exist anywhere,” says the prof., who plans to expandhis research to determine whether the online students performed better becausethey spent more time collaborating with their classmates, or because of the onlineformat of the class. (Chronicle of Higher Education 21 Feb 97)

Results from final examinations are often used as evidence of learning. In the fall of 98, theNKI Internet College compared 1118 grades obtained by regular part-time students with368 grades obtained by online students. The grades were given in seven courses in whichthe exams were identical for the two groups of students. The results confirmed a similarstudy of 1302 grades from 89 to 91. Both studies show that the online students havebetter average grades and a lower percentage of failing grades. This does not necessarilyshow that the online courses were better than the traditional part-time courses, but it showsthat online learning seems to work very well for students who have chosen to study online.

Peter Cookson’s article Persistence in Distance Education reviews the research on learnerpersistence in distance education. In the article, Cookson (1990) suggested the fourteeninterventions presented in List 2, which might stimulate learner persistence and reducedropouts:



http://teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/

http://teleeducation.nb.ca/content/articles/english/A-Significant-Difference.html

http://teleeducation.nb.ca/content/media/0297/betteronline.html

http://teleeducation.nb.ca/content/articles/english/A-Significant-Difference.html

List 2. Fourteen interventions to stimulate learner persistence and reduce dropouts

In 1996, NKI conducted a study that showed that of about 1,000 online courses studentshad enrolled in between 1987 and 1993, 81.3 percent were completed. It is notappropriate to make any firm conclusions from these data, but NKI has reason to believethat the completion rate of online courses is at least as good as that of other part-timecourses.

1. Students’ active participation should be sought in planning remedial or introductorycourses.

2. Interviews with students while in their first year (or even before it starts).3. Skilled diagnostic counseling to “help each applicant to explore his aims, motiva-

tion and commitment and comprehend how they might relate to the ... [institution]”.4. Counseling out of high risk students.5. “Conditional registration ... after students have taken advantage of the counseling

service, every effort should be made by the University to ensure that they are ableto follow the courses they really want... Students interested in courses which entailprojects should be made aware of the volume of work involved and the type oflibrary resources required (especially remote students)”.

6. “Counselors, academic advisors, course designers, and administrators of distance-taught programs should develop a diagnostic and remedial program to assiststudents in organizing their time and energy toward a successful completion oftheir study program”.

7. Regulate the study load of students.8. Active tutorial assistance during the course. This might be provided either face-to-

face or via mediated communications.9. Examination of students’ completed assignments to analyze students’ cognitive learn-

ing styles, strengths and weaknesses, and affective responses to the instructionalmaterials.

10. Provide option of longer time period for students with difficulty to complete thecourse.

11. Monitor the performance of participant instructors for needs amenable to improvevia in-service training.

12. Distance education institutions should develop programs to enhance their aca-demic status and social credibility so as to enhance student satisfaction andcommitment.

13. Concentrate resources for student advising and other assistance on the morevulnerable first-year students.

14. Periodical redesign of courses and print materials. Cookson (1990)



Online Teaching Methods, Devices, and TechniquesThis section deals with online teaching methods, techniques, and devices. We shall look atfour online teaching methods and a number of recommended teaching techniques anddevices.

Teaching MethodsVerner (1964, 36) distinguished between individual and group methods of teaching.Applied to online education, you will encounter a more detailed classification of methods.Harasim (1989) distinguished between one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many learn-ing approaches. Here Harasim’s classification is supplemented with the one-online learningapproach to support the four communication paradigms often used in CMC. The para-digms are information retrieval, e-mail, bulletin boards, and computer conferencing. Theclassification is derived from Rapaport (1991) who used it in his book Computer MediatedCommunications: Bulletin Boards, Computer Conferencing, Electronic Mail, and Informa-tion Retrieval. In accordance with the discussion above, we will here distinguish betweenthe four methods: one-online, one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many.

Teaching DevicesVerner (1964, 37) referred to “various mechanical instruments, audiovisual aids, physicalarrangements, and materials” as devices that can enhance the effectiveness of an adulteducation process. Verner also stated that television could be regarded as a device whenused in a classroom and as a method when it is the primary medium used in a distanceeducation setting. From this, one may argue that CMC could be regarded as both deviceand method. Here CMC is viewed from the device perspective.

Let us use the CMC-classification derived from Rapaport (1991). There are four majorCMC-devices: information retrieval systems, e-mail systems, bulletin board systems, andcomputer conferencing systems. These devices correspond to the four methods: one-online,one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many.

Teaching TechniquesWe use teaching techniques to accomplish teaching objectives. The techniques introducedhere are organized according to the four communication paradigms used in CMC. Thetechniques are discussed in more detail elsewhere in this book.

The foregoing considerations result in a framework of four methods, four devices, and anumber of techniques as shown in Table 1. First, the techniques classified as one-online arecharacterized by information retrieval from online resources, and the fact that a student canperform the learning task without communication with the teacher or other students (e.g.search of online databases). Second, the techniques classified as one-to-one can be con-ducted via e-mail applications (e.g. e-mail based correspondence studies). Third, the tech-niques discussed as one-to-many will typically be conducted via the WWW, bulletin



boards, or distribution lists for e-mail (e.g. publication of a lecture). Finally, the techniquespresented as many-to-many can be organized within computer conferencing systems, bul-letin board systems, or distribution lists for e-mail (e.g. debates).

Table 1. Online teaching methods, devices, and techniques

Teaching Methods Teaching Techniques Teaching Devices

One-online Online Databases Information Retrieval Online Publications SystemsOnline Software ApplicationsOnline Interest GroupsInterviews

One-to-one Learning Contracts E-mail SystemsApprenticeshipsInternshipsCorrespondence Studies

One-to-many Lectures Bulletin Board SystemsSymposiumsSkits

Many-to-many Debates Computer Conferencing Simulations or Games SystemsRole-playsCase StudiesDiscussionsTranscript-based AssignmentsBrainstorming sessionsDelphi TechniquesNominal Group TechniquesForumsProjectsStudent Presentations

Teaching Functions and FacilitationTechniquesIn this section, we shall look at the duties teachers have with regard to the teachingprocess. We shall study the distinctions between the teachers’ organizational, social,intellectual, and assessment functions. We shall spend some time on issues that influenceteaching style, and finally, we shall study some recommended moderation and facilitationtechniques.



...some conferences possess an energy that encourages active participation,while others, apparently designed to facilitate discussion of equally relevant andinteresting topics, seem to spit and sputter, with minor flurries of activity and little ofvalue to offer to the participant.... The important thing to remember is that a flexi-ble approach to moderation is a key element in the creation of an energetic con-ferencing environment (Brochet 1989, 6.02-3).

The quote, which was found in a report from a closed conference on moderating computerconferences, expresses the importance of how teachers moderate computer conferences.Supporting this notion, there are many more articles that discuss moderation of educationalcomputer conference courses (for example, Davie 1989, Eisley 1991, Feenberg 1989a,Feenberg 1989b, Feenberg 1991, Hiltz 1988, Kerr 1986, and Mason 1991). Myreview of these articles revealed a host of experience and advice with regard to moderatorroles and facilitation techniques for educational computer conferences. They are, however,mostly based on personal experiences in specific contexts that may or may not be relevantto other moderators in different contexts.

Rather than professing general guidelines for facilitation of educational CMC, we shallhere argue that the way teachers handle their teaching functions is influenced by theirphilosophical orientation and theory of education, and that they should be aware of theiroptions with regard to facilitation techniques. Hence, the material we shall look at isorganized and discussed with regard to philosophical orientation and theories of edu-cation, teaching functions, and facilitation techniques.

Teaching StyleIf you are a teacher and would like to assess your teaching style, you may use the Principlesof Adult Learning Scale (PALS), developed by Conti (1991). High PALS scores indicate thatyou have a learner-centered style, and low scores indicate a teacher-centered style. Thescales comprise seven factors that are of importance to your teaching style. The factorsrelate to the teachers’ attitudes toward: learner-centered activities, personalizing instruction,relating to experience, assessing student needs, climate building, participation in the learn-ing process, and flexibility for personal development.

Your teaching style is based on your philosophical orientation and your theories ofeducation. In discussing adult education philosophies, Zinn (1991) distinguished betweenliberal, behaviorist, progressive, humanistic, and radical philosophies. These and otherphilosophies in adult education are presented in selected writings edited by Merriam(1984) and Jarvis (1987). An interesting online resource is The Theory Into Practice(www.gwu.edu/~tip/) database that contains descriptions of 50 theories relevant tohuman learning and instruction. With regard to distance education, Keegan (1988)identified three theoretical positions: theories of autonomy and independence, theories ofindustrialization, and theories of interaction and communication. Discussing these theore-tical positions, Paulsen (1992b) presented a theory of cooperative freedom (page 39),which was a first attempt to establish a distance education theory attuned to CMC. In other



www.gwu.edu/~tip/

words, teachers will perceive their online education functions in light of their basic theoriesand philosophies concerning education.

Moderation and FacilitationFacilitation techniques are ways of helping others learn. Teachers moderate when they pre-side over a discussion group or a class forum. According to Eastmond, successful computerconference facilitation is akin to successful facilitation of adult education in other situations:

Effective facilitators know the student group well and persist in carrying the discus-sion onward. They are enthusiastic, both about the subject matter and computerconferencing. They are innovative and try new instructional techniques. They areflexible, allowing for changes in plans and circumstances. Finally, they deal withindividual and group problems the class is facing (Eastmond 1992, 33).

Ahern, Peck, and Laycock, (1992, 291) investigated teacher discourse in computer-mediated discussion studying 80 volunteer students in an undergraduate introductoryeducational theory and policy course at a large public university. The study comparedquestion only, statements only, and conversational discourse. It concluded that conver-sational discourse is possible and desirable and that it produced higher levels of studentparticipation with more complex interaction patterns.

Addressing facilitation of discussion in general, Brookfield (1991, 195) stated that“discussion is by its very nature unpredictable.” He elaborates on this through five com-ponents in his theory on discussion leadership:

1. Be wary of standardized approaches. Every discussion group comprises participants withdifferent backgrounds, personalities, and learning styles. So, no standardizedapproach can be presumed to be appropriate for all groups.

2. Use a diversity of approaches. It is recommended to have a reservoir of questions anddiscussion leads at hand to personalize the discussion.

3. Welcome the unanticipated. Discussion is always unpredictable and moderators shouldbe ready to depart from the general line of discussion to follow up themes which ariseunexpectedly.

4. Attend to the emotional dimension. Discussions can become competitive and emotionalbattlegrounds or highly personal fora for sharing of private thoughts. Moderators mustbe prepared to handle such charged situations.

5. Be authentic in the group. The most damaging mistakes moderators can make is to pre-tend to a personality they don’t possess. It is far better for moderators to accept theirpersonality and build on their inherent strengths.

Brochet (1989) stressed the importance of moderation to the success of computer con-ferencing and discussed the following six role functions:



1. The goal setter, who makes plans for the conference and decides whether the plansshould be changed during the conference.

2. The discriminator, who differentiates between useful and useless ideas.3. The host, who creates the feeling of trust and motivates contributions.4. The pace setter, who removes communication barriers and promotes cooperation.5. The explainer, who relays overlooked messages and raises questions that have

remained unanswered.6. The entertainer, who evaluates the conference mood and ensures that participants are

relaxed.

Categories of Teaching FunctionsIn an article on effective facilitation of computer conferencing, Eastmond (1992, 30)argued that the moderator role includes duties such as spelling out the expectations and thenorms of behavior; defining the objectives, tasks, resources, and division of labor;developing the conference agenda; monitoring the participation; giving recognition; keep-ing a positive climate; directing and summarizing the conference; keeping the participantsfocused on their objectives; recognizing constraints; providing discussion and reflection onthe communication process; and finally exercising editorial rights to censor, or harmonizeinteraction.

Discussing group dynamics in general, Forsyth (1990, 112) classified the roles into twobasic functions: task roles and socio-emotional roles. According to Eastmond (1992, 33),Feenberg (1986) proposed that CMC instructors must apply procedural and intellectualleadership. Combining Forsyth’s and Feenberg’s approach and focusing on computer con-ferencing, Mason’s 1991 article on moderating educational computer conferencing identi-fied three role functions that computer conferencing moderators must possess. Based on aliterature review, Mason stated that:

The advice on tutoring skills for educational computer conferencing falls generallyinto three categories: organizational, social, and intellectual.

Organizational role. One of the first duties of an online tutor is to “set the agenda”for the conference: the objectives of the discussion, the timetable, procedural rulesand decision-making norms. Managing the interactions with strong leadership anddirection is considered a sine qua non of successful conferencing...

Social role. Creating a friendly, social environment for learning is also seen asan essential moderator skill. Sending welcoming messages at the beginning andencouraging participation throughout are specific examples, but providing lots offeedback on students’ inputs, and using a friendly, personal tone are consideredequally important...

Intellectual role. The most important role of the online tutor, of course, is that ofeducational facilitator. As in any kind of teaching, the moderator should focusdiscussions on crucial points, ask questions and probe responses to encouragestudents to expand and build on comments... (Mason, 1991).



Mason did not focus on assessment, but obviously assessment is an important teachingfunction and a major part of many teachers’ workload. Assignments and assessment tech-niques should therefore be designed with this in mind. In her discussion on student activi-ties, Thorpe (1987, 11) presented the assignment types: in-text questions for self-assess-ment, computer-marked assignments for computer assessment, and tutor-marked assignmentsfor tutor assessment. Here, peer assessment is introduced as a fourth category. All fourassessment techniques can be applied in online courses, and especially computerizedassessment tools such as multiple choice assignments could benefit from integration withCMC.

Some pioneers (Eisley 1991, Feenberg 1989b, and Hiltz 1988) have discussed moder-ation of educational computer conferences in particular. Eisley’s contribution was based onhis experiences from a graduate program offered through computer conferencing at BoiseState University. Hiltz’ report was based on research on teaching in a virtual classroomthrough the EIES system at the New Jersey Institute of Technology. Feenberg’s perspectivewas derived from his CMC work at Western Behavioral Sciences Institute. In Figure 9 andthe following paragraphs, their recommended facilitation techniques are compiled andorganized according to the four teaching functions: organizational, social, intellectual, andassessment. Several of the techniques may fit into more than one category, so the suggestedcategorization is meant to be a guide rather than a definitive classification. Further, some ofthe statements presented here seem to contradict each other, and others seem to beredundant. They are, however, included to indicate the array of recommendations available.

Figure 9. Mind map of facilitation techniques

Based on recommendations by Eisley, Feenberg, Hiltz, and Thorpe



With regard to the social function of distance education, Holmberg’s theory of guideddidactic conversation postulates that: “Feelings of personal relation between the teachingand the learning parties promote study pleasure and motivation” (Holmberg, 1988, 115).However, in discussing facilitation techniques for educational computer conferences,authors tend to focus on the organizational function of the moderator role. One may inferthat this is because the intellectual and social functions are less influenced by the mediumthan the organizational function. Hence, the facilitation techniques presented in thefollowing demonstrate a preoccupation with the organizational function. The techniques arebased on Eisley’s, Hiltz’, Feenberg’s, and Thorpe’s personal experiences in specific contextsthat may or may not be relevant to teachers in other contexts.

Facilitation Techniques for Organizational Functions1.Spur participation when it is lagging. For example, request direct comments and

responses to the issues discussed (Eisley 1991).2.Require regular participation. To maintain an active dialogue, it is necessary to exhort

students to log on at least twice a week. One feasible mechanism to handle this is theweekly quiz (Hiltz 1988).

3.Use response activities. The response activity feature of the EIES conferencing system wasdeveloped to force active participation. Here, each student must post a response to aquestion before access to the other answers is granted (Hiltz 1988).

4.Move misplaced content. Immediately move contributions under a wrong discussionheading (Eisley 1991).

5.Handle tangents appropriately. Refer inappropriate digressions to another conference, orguide the students back to the original topic (Eisley 1991).

6.Vary participation. Ask the overly outspoken privately to wait a few responses beforecontributing. In the same way, ask less outspoken individuals to participate moreactively, and call on specific individuals just as a teacher might call on a student in atraditional class (Eisley 1991).

7.Occasionally have a student conduct the discussion. Students could take turns as assistantmoderators (Eisley 1991).

8.Give a decisive end to each discussion. Conclude discussions that drag on after theyhave served their purpose. Such discussions will distract from other topics on whichstudents should focus (Eisley 1991).

9. Invite visiting experts. Guest experts may join the conference, and students may be askedto present questions to the visitor (Hiltz 1988).

10.Be patient. Be prepared to wait several days for comments and responses, and don’trush in to fill every silence with moderator contributions (Feenberg 1989b).

11. Don’t overload. Post about one long comment a day. If the students have much to offer,the moderator should contribute less so that the slower participants can keep up(Feenberg 1989b).

12.Read the status report daily. Don’t let too many of the participants fall far behind(Feenberg 1989b).



13.Don’t lecture. Use open-ended remarks, examples, and weaving. An elaborate, logicallycoherent sequence of comments yields silence (Feenberg 1989b).

14.Prompt frequently. Use private messages to urge participants to take part in the discus-sion, to initiate debates, and to solicit suggestions (Feenberg 1989b).

15.Use simple assignments. Don’t be apprehensive about presenting assignments to thegroup, but keep the threshold of participation low (Feenberg 1989b).

16.Be clear. Begin with an opening comment that succinctly states the conference topicand the moderator’s initial expectations and continue to clarify the topic and theexpectations as the conference proceeds (Feenberg 1989b).

17.Set up student interaction. Encourage participants to address each other as well as themoderator (Feenberg 1989b).

18.Synchronize and resynchronize. Make sure everyone begins concurrently and offerperiodic occasions to restart in unison (Feenberg 1989b).

19.Remember the “law” of proportionality. Recall that faculty generally contributes about onequarter to one half of the online material (Feenberg 1989b).

20.Take the procedural initiative. Avoid frustrating procedural discussions by providinggroups with strong procedural leadership (Feenberg 1989b).

Facilitation Techniques for Social Functions1. Reinforce good discussant behaviors. Say, for example, thank you to students who

respond effectively online (Eisley 1991).2. Request change in poor discussant behaviors. For example, tactfully point out that the class

should be more directly responsive to each other’s comments (Eisley 1991).3. Hang loose. Don’t present an elaborate seminar agenda at the outset, just follow the

flow of the conversation while guiding it toward the subject (Feenberg 1989b).4. Be responsive. Respond swiftly to every contribution either by posting a personal

message to the contributor or by referring to the author’s comment in the conference(Feenberg 1989b).

5. Request metacomments. Invite participants to express how they feel about the coursewithin the conference (Feenberg 1989b).

Facilitation Techniques for Intellectual Functions1. Summarize the discussion. If the discussion is an especially lengthy one, summarize

occasionally (Eisley 1991).2. Write weaving comments. Summarize the state of the conference every week or two as

a means of focusing discussion (Feenberg 1989b).3. Respond to student contributions and weave them together. It is not advisable to respond to

each individual contribution; it is better to respond to several at once by weaving themtogether. Do refer to students by name (Hiltz 1988).

4. Make the material relevant. The course material could be made more relevant bydeveloping questions and assignments that relate to student experiences and currentevents (Hiltz 1988).



5. Present conflicting opinions. Conflicting opinions could be exposed through instructorswith different backgrounds, debates, and peer critique (Hiltz 1988).

6. Request responses. The instructor may ask individual students to comment on specificissues that are relevant to their specific backgrounds (Hiltz 1988).

7. Simulate an agent provocateur. By using a pen name, instructors can question orchallenge their own entries. This device could be used to set up a discussion or to setan example for student inquiries (Hiltz 1988).

8. Be objective. Don’t generalize about a conference without considering the contributionswith regard to contents, author, and time of announcement (Feenberg 1989b).

9. Expect less. Be content if the moderator succeeds in communicating two or three goodmajor points in the course of a month of discussion (Feenberg 1989b).

10.Don’t rely on off-line materials. The discussion must be largely self-contained to succeed,so summarize assigned readings online (Feenberg 1989b).

Facilitation of Assessment Functions1. In-text questions (ITQs) could be used for self-assessment. (Thorpe 1987)2. Computer-marked assignments (CMAs) are made for computer assessment. (Thorpe

1987)3. Tutor-marked assignments (TMAs) are made for tutor assessment. (Thorpe 1987)4. Peer assessment is a fourth category of assessment.

Evaluation of Online StudentsThis section is about important issues to consider when developing an assessment systemfor an online course. Assignments are an important part of an assessment system. Weshall be looking at self-assessment, computer assessment, tutor assessment, and peerassessment.

AssignmentsAssignments are specific tasks (e.g. essays or problem sets) given by course designers ortutors at regular intervals throughout a course, as part of the overall assessment of students.Moore and Kearsley (1996) provide the following guidance on using assignmentseffectively in distance education courses:

Most formal distance learning courses involve a series of assignments, nearlyalways an essay or other written exercise, to be completed on a regular basis(e.g., every week or two) during the course. This structure serves not only to pro-vide the student with feedback on progress but also to pace the student throughthe course. In general, setting assignments with cutoff dates motivates the studentto keep up with the work, and helps to prevent them from dropping out. However,assignments are only effective if the student receives meaningful feedback from theinstructor or tutor. If students only receive a grade or acknowledgment that the



assignment was received, the utility and motivational value of assignments issignificantly diminished. Instructional designers have to be careful not to overloadstudents with too many assignments...

(http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Instruction/asgn-02.html)

They also tell us something of what students expect in terms of grading and feedback onassignments:

■ fair and objective grading■ to have their work treated with respect■ an explanation and justification of the grade awarded■ a clear indication of how they can improve both in terms of specific responses to

questions and in general■ encouragement and reassurance about their ability and progress■ constructive criticism and advice■ an opportunity to respond if desired■ a timely response (i.e., before the next assignment is due)

(http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Instruction/asgn-02.html)

Formative and Summative AssessmentAssessment is a major concern in designing and running online courses, and Derek Rown-tree has presented an overview of the main strategic issues in his article Designing anAssessment System. In the overview he focuses on the following questions:

■ What is assessment?■ Why might we assess?■ What might we assess?■ Who might do the assessing?■ How might we assess?■ What might we do as a result of assessment?

Assessment could be used both as a tool for measurement of student performance and as atool for helping students to learn. The Production Handbook for Open University Courses andPacks provides the following definitions:

Assessment is the general term used for measuring students’ performance on a courseagainst the aims and objectives of that course. Assessment may be formative or summative.

Formative Assessment is assessment as part of teaching: questions and assignments set tohelp the student learn effectively, but not used to determine the student’s course results.

Summative Assessment is assessment to determine a student’s overall level of performanceon the course: questions and assignments, the grades or scores of which are used indetermining the student’s course result.

There is a potential conflict between formative and summative assessment as Rowntree



http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Instruction/asgn-02.html

http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Instruction/asgn-02.html

(www-iet.open.ac.uk/pp/D.G.F.Rowntree/Assessment.html) describes in his article Design-ing an assessment system:

While formative assessment is usually for the student’s benefit, summative assess-ment is often for the benefit of other people – e.g. other teachers or potentialemployers – who might use the information you provide to make decisions affect-ing the student’s life-chances. Herein lies a potential conflict of roles for the teacher– between helper and informer – and a conflict between formative and summativeassessment. Students who most need help may be reluctant to reveal their difficul-ties, or to choose learning options that are more challenging, for fear of beingadversely reported on.

Four Types of AssessmentAssessment could be done in several ways. According to Thorpe (1987, 11) the OpenUniversity, UK used in-text questions (ITQs) for self-assessment, computer-marked assign-ments (CMAs), and tutor-marked assignments (TMAs). Here, peer assessment is included asa fourth category of assessment.

ITQs are developed for self-assessment. For example, they could include questions thatask the students to review, revise, or summarize what they have learned from the coursematerial. As a guide to self-assessment, the course material could also include suggestedsolutions and discussion of pitfalls.

Example of an assignment that applies self-assessment: Write down your own definitionof an ITQ and compare it with the one you find in Thorpe’s article.

CMAs utilize computer assessment. They are typically multiple-choice questions, andThorpe (1987, 15) stated that over 90 percent of the CMA question sets at the OpenUniversity have been of the multiple-choice type. Variations of interactive multiple-choiceassessments are short-answer, jumbled-sentence, crossword, matching, ordering, and gap-fill exercises. More and more multimedia examples of these assignments are also available.CMAs are well suited for online assessment since both technologies are based on comput-ers. But it could be both difficult and a lot of work to develop high quality quizzes, alterna-tive answers, and a comment or an explanation for each alternative answer.

Example of an assignment that utilize computer assessment:



www-iet.open.ac.uk/pp/D.G.F.Rowntree/Assessment.html

There are both free and commercial tools available for computer-assisted assessment.Among them are Teaching Templates (www.tac-soft.com), Questionmark Perception(www.questionmark.com), and Hot Potatoes (http://web.uvic.ca/hrd/hotpot). Moreinformation can for example be found at:

■ Computer Assisted Assessment: Tools, Resources and Articles (www.ulst.ac.uk/cticomp/CAA.html)

■ Knowledge Statistics (www.kstats.com)■ QuestBack (www.questback.no)

TMAs are made for tutor assessment. These could take the form of an essay or a problem tosolve. Thorpe (1987, 16) wrote that the TMAs were the most important elements of thecontinuous assessment part of all undergraduate courses at the Open University. Obviously,TMAs could be a major contribution to the teacher workload, and should therefore be care-fully designed with this in mind.

Example of an assignment in which tutor assessment results in a heavy workload: Writean essay in which you discuss tutor assessment from both the learner’s and the tutor’s pointof view. Post the essay as an e-mail to your tutor.

Example of an assignment in which tutor assessment results in a less heavy workload:Write an essay in which you discuss tutor assessment from both the learner’s and the tutor’spoint of view. Write the essay together with two other students, and post the essay as ane-mail to your tutor.

Peer assessment is included as a fourth category of assessment because online educationprovides more opportunities for peer communication than the traditional distance educationsetting at the Open University as described by Thorpe (1987). Peer assessment could beboth informal comments among students collaborating on an assignment and more formalfeedback on individual assignments.

Example of an assignment that involves one peer student: Write an essay in which youdiscuss peer assessment from both the learners’ and the tutor’s point of view. Find a peerstudent who would like to collaborate with you, and exchange essays for mutual peerassessment.

Example of an assignment that involves several peer students: Write an essay in whichyou discuss peer assessment from both the learners’ and the tutor’s point of view. Submit theessay to the discussion forum. Then comment on two essays submitted by your peers.

All four categories of assessment could be used for both formative and summativeassessment. As a teacher, you may benefit from using the matrix presented in Table 2 toplan your assessment scheme.



www.tac-soft.com

www.questionmark.com

http://web.uvic.ca/hrd/hotpot

www.ulst.ac.uk/cticomp/CAA.html

www.kstats.com

www.questback.no

Table 2. Assessment matrix used for assignment analysis in an ongoing online course

Assessment categories Formative assessment Summative assessment

Self-assessment Self-assessment found to Students were asked tobe applied in assignments write a self-assessment 1 and 5 report (20 % of final grade)

Computer assessment Computer assessment found Computer assessment was to be applied in assignments not used for summative 2 and 4 assessment in this course

Tutor assessment Tutor assessment found to be The tutor has to assess theapplied in assignment 3 final report (80 % of

final grade)

Peer assessment Peer assessment was used to Peer assessment was not receive comments on the used for summative assess-draft report ment in this course

My assignment analyses (Paulsen 1998, 181) of 23 online courses revealed 14 instancesof tutor assessment, 11 of self-assessment, 6 of peer assessment, and 5 of computer assess-ment. This indicates that tutor assessment and self-assessment are more common than peerassessment and computer assessment. Further, no course was found that applied all fourassessment functions. In this study, I did not distinguish between formative and summativeassessment.

Five Strategies to Organize and Improve Online AssessmentAssessment systems are strong indicators of how seriously course providers value their aims.One could argue that summative assessment is such an important issue for students, teach-ers, and course providers that experimentation with online assessment functions is risky andhard to find support for. Two obvious challenges for online assessment are authentication ofstudent identification and detection of plagiarized digital material. However, there aresome strategies that could improve online assessment. In my thesis work (Paulsen, 1998),I have suggested that course providers should consider the five strategies in List 3 toorganize and improve online assessment.

List 3. Five strategies to organize and improve online assessment

1. Consider testing the learners’ ability to find and apply information, rather than tomemorize and reproduce it. One possible approach to online assessment couldbe to focus more on the students’ knowledge management abilities and less ontheir knowledge of the course content as Mason discussed in her book onglobal education:



Teaching Incentives and BarriersIn this section we shall be discussing what motivates online teachers and the problems theyencounter when they teach online. It focuses on the teachers’ preactive and interactiveworkload, their perception of the workload, and alternative strategies to reduce the work-load.

The available literature on the perspectives of distance education faculty is also relevantto online teachers. Moore and Kearsley (1996) have summarized some reviews on facultyperspectives and evaluation about distance education in general – including teaching via

...content-based methods of assessment are still being applied to conditionswhich demand a skills-based approach. This is undoubtedly because it iseasier to design reliable assessment systems, which test content rather thanprocess. We have much less experience in assessing students’ knowledgemanagement abilities, the ways in which the course has transformed their think-ing, and developed their skills in communicating and working with colleaguesin the domain of the course content (Mason 1998, 42).

2. Consider applying assessment that does not require face-to-face sessions. It is note-worthy to observe that online assessment is not necessarily viewed as animportant part of courses. However if online courses rely on assessment in face-to-face sessions, flexibility for the students is substantially limited. For example,centralized, face-to-face examinations are not convenient for students who livefar from the examination site. In comparison, assessment based on projectreports and term papers are much more flexible with regard to time and space.

3. Consider including computer assessment. Computer assessment would suit onlinecourses very well since course providers and learners have computers at theirdisposal. Such assessment could include simple multiple-choice assignments ormore complex tutorials that monitor the students’ progress. Further, computerassessment could provide immediate feedback and reduce teacher workload.

4. Consider including peer assessment. CMC could be very well suited for peerassessment because students easily can share and comment on contributions.After all, most CMC systems are developed to facilitate such collaboration.Further, by requiring peer students to take part in the process, assessment couldbecome an integral part of their learning experience.

5. Consider using group assignments. Assessment of group assignments is likely torequire less teacher workload than assessment of similar assignments preparedby individual students. Further, collaboration among online students couldincrease learning and result in a product of higher quality.



video, audio and computer conferencing. In the article they present the following findingsfrom Dillon and Walsh (1992):

■ Faculty indicates that distance teaching requires a personalized and empathic rapportwith students.

■ Communication skills (voice quality, eye contact, body language, clarity) are critical fordistance teachers.

■ Faculty who teach at a distance are generally positive toward distance education, andtheir attitudes tend to become more positive with experience.

■ Faculty motivation for teaching at a distance comes from intrinsic (e.g., challenge)rather than extrinsic (e.g., financial rewards) motivation.

■ Faculty believes that distance teaching experience improves their traditional teaching aswell. (http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Instruction/tut-01.html)

Moore and Kearsley (1996) also refer to Blanch (1994) who analyzed the barriers tofaculty adoption of distance education approaches at California State PolytechnicUniversity. They stated that the greatest obstacles were:

■ a lack of awareness on the part of the university community of the general benefits ofdistance education;

■ lack of incentives for faculty to be involved in distance education;■ the unreasonableness of expecting faculty to commit themselves to a very different

teaching approach without any trial period; and■ the faculty’s sense that distance education was not integrated within the university’s

programs and plans. This last obstacle emphasizes the importance of an institution-widepolicy regarding distance education. (http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Instruction/tut-01.html)

Finally, Moore and Kearsley (1996) included the following recommendations to admini-strators who wish to support good distance teaching. The recommendations are based onBarker and Dickson’s (1993) experiences at Western Illinois University:

■ Hire support personnel to provide assistance with instructional design and the instal-lation, operation, or maintenance of equipment.

■ Establish a faculty development laboratory to provide a place to try out and practicewith technology.

■ Provide administrative support for distance education efforts.■ Be sensitive to faculty’s needs for incentives and recognition for distance teaching efforts.■ Provide faculty training, not only in the use of the technology involved but also in

presentation and participation skills. (http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Instruction/tut-01.html)



http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Instruction/tut-01.html




The three studies presented above focus on distance education, not on online education.They indicate, however, that a number of changes must be made both institutionally andindividually to ensure successful online teaching. In particular, administrators of onlineprograms must develop strategies to reduce barriers to online teaching and providesufficient incentives to recruit and keep competent online teachers.

Teacher WorkloadTeaching workload can be defined as the time spent on teaching. As we shall see later,teaching workload consists of a preactive and an interactive phase. The workload relatesto the teaching functions, and one may assume that teaching workload depends on severalfactors such as the number of learners, the teaching system context, the preferred teachingmethods and techniques, the moderator’s teaching style and facilitation techniques, thecourse design, the characteristics of student assignments, and the assessment requirements.

Weiss et al (1994) compiled a list of possible teaching workload measures. They fellinto the following five major areas:

1. Overall Faculty Teaching Workload: These indicators included broad, general measuresof teaching workload such as credit units per faculty FTE [full-time equivalent],student/faculty FTE ratios, and measures of the number of majors and degreesawarded per faculty FTE.

2. Individual Faculty Teaching Loads: These indicators included number of courses taught perladder-rank faculty and were designed to measure students’ exposure to ladder facultyas a function of course level.

3. Number of Courses Offered: These indicators involved looking at the unique course offer-ings in the curricula of different departments and disciplines and were included in orderto assess the diversity, scope, and breadth of course offerings available to students.

4. Number of Class Sections Offered: These indicators involved looking at the total numberof courses offered by level of course: lower division, upper division, graduate; and bytype of course: regular primary (lecture, seminar) vs. exceptional instruction (independ-ent study), and provided an assessment of the availability of classes.

5. Class Size: These indicators included measures of the relative size of courses at differentlevels and the number of courses offered below minimum policy, providing indicators ofinstructional quality and utilization of instructional resources.

The workload measures presented by Weiss et al. are compiled with the emphasis onuniversity faculty. For online teachers, there are other concerns:

In traditional education and training the allocation of resources is controlled by the“ringing of the bell”; the bell bounds the dialogue. The curriculum and the bell areuseful instruments in the process of estimating the consumption of resources. Evenin education or training based on counseling the learner has to make an



appointment and estimate the duration and there might be other students at theoffice waiting for guidance. You can “see and hear” the boundaries of theresources and above all, these boundaries are socially accepted (Jensen 1993, 72).

In correspondence courses, teachers are accustomed to mail carriers who deliver mail oncea day. Online teachers, however, may receive e-mail 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.The online immediacy results in student demand for swifter responses and, hence, heavierworkloads for teachers.

In 1982, Turoff (1982, 76) wrote: “There is a tremendous investment in teaching a courseonline.” A number of authors have since supported the statement. Experiences from the NKIElectronic College showed that the teacher’s main reservation about educational CMC is theheavy teaching workload introduced by the medium (Paulsen 1992a, 14; Paulsen andRekkedal 1990, 9). In a report on teaching in a virtual classroom, Hiltz concluded:

You are going to work harder in teaching a course online, at least the first time....Being a “virtual” professor is a little bit like parenthood. You are “on duty” all thetime, and there seems to be no end to the demands on your time and energy(Hiltz 1988, 31).

In an article that focused on the teacher’s role in the Arts Foundation courses at JutlandOpen University in Denmark, Christensen (1990) concluded that CMC introduces morework for the teachers. Likewise, Kaye (1989, 19) wrote: “Conferencing is likely to requiremore inputs, and more time, from tutors than the traditional distance education situation.”Reporting from an online interview with 20 teachers, Jensen (1993, 69) confirmed that themajority of the respondents pointed out that they “spend more time on online teaching thanthey would do teaching the same material real-time.” Comparing face-to-face and onlinetutoring in a two-year, part-time program for Management Development at LancasterUniversity, UK, Hardy (1993, 343) stated that tutors have “little control over the amount ofactivity online and therefore less control over his or her volume of work.”

Describing his experiences from teaching three computer programming courses viaBitnet, Johnson (1993) stated that teaching a course for the first time on a network multipliesthe amount of time required almost tenfold as compared with on-campus teaching. Hefurther contended that subsequent courses require at least double the amount of timeneeded for on-campus courses. In an international review of CMC, Wells (1992, 12)stated that successive offerings of a course might be less time-consuming and argued thatother ways to control instructor workload may be to:

■ encourage peer learning as a means to redistribute some instructional responsibilities;■ allow former students to become active alumni by retaining their participation privi-

leges;



■ broaden the range of contacts available to students; and■ divide the instructional responsibilities between individuals.

Preactive and Interactive WorkloadIn an article about correspondence studies, Moore (1990) discussed the preactive andinteractive phases of teaching, commonly referred to as program design and instruction:

While preactive teaching is deliberative, a highly rational process, interactiveteaching is more spontaneous and to some extent controlled by the students’questions, requests, and reactions (Moore 1990, 348).

Søby (1992) argued that CMC could shift the focus of distance education from an institu-tion-centered model based mainly on a preactive structure to a participant-centered modelwithin an interactive learning environment.

How much work should program planners and teachers invest in each of the twophases depends, among other things, on the number of students that are expected to enrollon the course. In a large-scale correspondence course at the British Open University (BOU),a design team of ten to twenty people could work two years with the preactive phase(Moore 1990, 349). Describing BOU courses that enrolled more than 1,000 online stu-dents, Mason (1990, 64) concluded: “conferencing is a viable medium in tutoring largenumbers of students at a distance.” On the other hand, Bates stated:

Third generation technologies [computer conferencing] are particularly valuablewhere relatively small numbers of students are concerned, since they avoid thehigh fixed production costs of the industrial mode, but they do not however bringthe economies of scale of the industrial model, unless the opportunities for inter-action for an individual student are dramatically curtailed (Bates 1991, 13).

Describing the experiences from NKI in Norway, Rekkedal stated:

Teaching via conferencing often becomes “labor intensive” on the part of the tutor.Originally we had a hypothesis that the supposed increase in learning quality inthe “virtual school” could be compensated for by less emphasis on the develop-ment of learning material. So far our experiences have not supported thisassumption. Thus, it seems that investments in pre-produced learning material willbe approximately the same as in other large-scale systems if the total quality is tobe satisfying (Rekkedal 1993, 710).

In my thesis on Teaching Techniques for Computer-mediated Communication, I did a survey of150 teachers regarding their perceptions of teacher workload associated with 24 differentteaching techniques. Based on this work I drew the following conclusions:



The general perception found in the questionnaire is that teacher workload ishigh. In 18 of the 24 techniques, there were more or as many teachers who per-ceived the workload to be high than to be low. It varies, however, considerablywith technique and context. First, the interviews indicate that one-online techniqueshave relatively low preactive and interactive workloads. Second, they imply thatone-to-one techniques have divergent preactive workloads and high interactiveworkloads. Third, one-to-many techniques have high preactive workloads anddivergent interactive workloads. Fourth, for many-to-many techniques, the preac-tive workloads vary considerably with technique, and the interactive workloadsseem to be high when teachers are highly involved in the interaction with students.(Paulsen 1998, 195)

These findings support the fact that CMC teaching is perceived to have a high workloadand that it is important to identify and refine efficient strategies to decrease the workload aswas discussed in the literature review. However, the survey also shows that most of theteachers teach courses with small-scale enrollment. So, one might expect that teacher work-load could become a major challenge for large-scale enrollment.

The perceptions of the teachers surveyed can be summed up in Table 3.

Table 3. Perceptions of preactive and interactive workload

Methods Preactive Workloads Interactive Workloads

One-online Relatively low Relatively low

One-to-one Divergent opinions Very high

One-to-many Relatively high Divergent opinions

Many-to-many Vary considerably with technique Depend on teacher involvement

Eight Strategies to Reduce Teacher WorkloadThe major concern arising from my thesis research (Paulsen 1998, 186) was how to keepteacher workload at an acceptable level. Hence, I suggested the eight strategies presentedin List 4 to reduce the workload per student associated with large-scale enrollment.

List 4. Eight strategies to reduce teacher workload

1. Form a group of experienced and well-trained teachers. The survey shows that theteachers have relatively little experience in CMC teaching, and one mayassume that the workload may be reduced as teachers are trained and gainmore experience. Courses on CMC teaching and teacher training programsshould be developed and made available to teachers. The survey revealed



that a number of such courses exist, but as additional research and experienceon CMC teaching become available, more and better courses should bedeveloped. Further, the literature review and the interviews indicate that theworkload is especially high the first time one teaches a CMC course, and thatmaterial developed for one course could be used again in other courses. Agroup of teachers could possibly also benefit from collaboration and exchangeof experience and course material. To facilitate teacher collaboration, theorganization could organize face-to-face seminars and online faculty loungesfor their teachers.

2. Establish a system for technical and administrative support. Some of the teacherssuggested that support staff or the supporting organization should handle somefunctions for the teachers. For example, technical questions could probably behandled better by the technical support staff, and administrative requests couldprobably be answered better and more efficiently by administrative staff. Evensenior students could be engaged to support new students in order to relieveteachers of trivial support work.

3. Shift attention from spontaneous interactive teaching to deliberate course design. Aninteractive workload depends more on the number of enrolled students than thepreactive workload does. Interactive workloads could be decreased throughcareful preactive design and preparation. The course designers should alsocarefully consider which teaching techniques are suitable for the course. So,one possible way to handle high enrollment figures would be to adapt thelarge-scale model with more emphasis on course design.

4. Pay special attention to the assessment workload per student when you design courseassignments. The number and form of course assignments are especially impor-tant for teacher workload. So, course designers should pay especial attentionto the teacher workload generated by the assignments. The teachers’ assess-ment workload could be reduced considerably by substituting teacher assess-ment with peer-, computer-, or self-assessment. Further, group assignments couldentail less teacher assessment than individual assignments do.

5. Restrict teacher interaction with individual students and small groups of students.Since the interactive workloads seem to be high in one-to-one techniques andin many-to-many techniques with high teacher involvement, high enrollmentcourses may have to use less of these interactive techniques even though theyare perceived to have high learner outcome. These results support Bates(1991, 13) when he stated that the technology does not bring economies ofscale unless the opportunities for interaction for individual students are dramati-cally curtailed.



Further ReadingBerge, Z. L. 1995. The Role of the Online Instructor/Facilitator.(www.emoderators.com/moderators/teach_online.html)

Diaz, D. P. 2000. Comparison of Student Characteristics, and evaluation of StudentSuccess, in an Online Health Education Course. (http://home.earthlink.net/~davidpdiaz/LTS/pdf_docs/dissertn.pdf)

Green, L. 1998. Playing Croquet with Flamingos: A Guide to Moderating OnlineConferences. (www.emoderators.com/moderators/flamingoe.pdf)

Nevin, A., S. Stutler, and D. Zambo. 1999. Lessons Learned while Team Teaching Usingthe Internet as an Instructional Delivery model. DEOSNEWS 9(8).(www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews9_8.asp)

Rohfeld, R. W. And R. Hiemstra. 1995. Moderating Discussions in the ElectronicClassroom (www.emoderators.com/moderators/rohfeld.html)

6. Encourage and facilitate interaction among students. Students should be regardedas a resource for mutual learning. Services, teaching techniques, and assign-ments could be designed to encourage and facilitate interaction amongstudents. Former students could become active alumni and be encouraged toparticipate in some interaction.

7. Automate responses. The teacher could develop a response library of often usedcomments and even present this on a bulletin board for Frequently AskedQuestions (FAQ). Further, automatic responses could be designed into acourse, for example as automatic e-mail responses or self-correcting quizzes.

8. Develop a scheme to handle the demand for expedient responses. Severalteachers comment that the time flexibility and the expected response time influ-ence the nature of their workload. Therefore, one might argue that relaxing therequirements for expedient responses and allowing more flexible working hourscould ease some teachers’ perception of workload. However, students wantexpedient feedback, so co-teaching, shift work, and the use of teachingassistants might be considered as schemes designed to share a continuous andincreasing workload among several individual teachers. All teachers shouldalso inform the students about their online work schedule, so that the studentsknow which days of the week and what time of the day responses fromteachers could be expected.



www.emoderators.com/moderators/teach_online.html

http://home.earthlink.net/~davidpdiaz/LTS/pdf_docs/dissertn.pdf

www.emoderators.com/moderators/flamingoe.pdf

www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews9_8.asp

www.emoderators.com/moderators/rohfeld.html

http://home.earthlink.net/~davidpdiaz/LTS/pdf_docs/dissertn.pdf

Links for Further InformationEffectively Using Electronic Conferencing. A document based on a lecture by LindaHarasim. (www.indiana.edu/~ecopts/ectips.html)

Survey Results - ANTA Online teaching & Learning Styles Projects.(www.tafe.sa.edu.au/lsrsc/one/natproj/tal/survey/index.htm)

Online Exercises (http://math.uc.edu/onex/compare.html)

Faculty Workload: An Integrative Model developed by Arizona State University(http://is.asu.edu/workload/)

ReferencesAhern, T. C., K. Peck, and M. Laycock. 1992. The Effects of Teacher Discourse in Com-puter-mediated Discussion. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 8(3):291-309.

Bates, T. 1991. Third generation distance education: The challenge of new technology.Research in Distance Education 3(2):10-15.

Baker, B. O. and Dickson, M. W. 1993. Aspects of successful practice for working withcollege faculty in distance learning programs. Ed Journal, 8(2), J-6.

Blanch, G. 1994. Don’t all faculty want their own TV show? Barriers to faculty participa-tion in distance education. DEOSNEWS, 4.(1).(www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews4_1.asp)

Brochet, M. G. 1989. Effective moderation of computer conferences: Notes and sugges-tions. In Moderating Conferences, ed. M. G. Brochet, 6.01-6.08. Guelph, Ontario:University of Guelph.

Brookfield, S. D. 1991. Discussion. In Adult Learning Methods, ed. M. W. Galbraith,187-204. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

Burge, E. J. 1991. Appreciation and description: Themes for germinal research. A paperpresented at The Second American Symposium on Research in Distance Education, May22-24, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.

Christensen, B. B. 1990. Teachers and CMC at Jutland Open University: A case study. InMedia and Technology in European Distance Education, ed. A. W. Bates, 253-58. MiltonKeynes: Open University for the EADTU.

Conti, G. J. 1991. Identifying your teaching style. In Adult Learning Methods, ed. M. W.Galbraith, 79-90. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

Cookson, P. 1990. Persistence in Distance Education. In Contemporary Issues in American Dis-tance Education, eds. M. G. Moore et al. Oxford: Pergamon Press, pp. 193–97, 201–02,203–04. (http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Design/kn-01.html)

Davie, L. 1989. Facilitation techniques for the on-line tutor. In Mindweave: Communica-tions, Computers, and Distance Education, eds. R. Mason and A. Kaye, 74-85. Oxford:Pergamon Press. (http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap6.html)

Dillon, C. L. And Walsh, S. J. 1992. Faculty: The neglected resource in distance educa-tion. American Journal of Distance Education 6(2), 64-69.



www.indiana.edu/~ecopts/ectips.html

www.tafe.sa.edu.au/lsrsc/one/natproj/tal/survey/index.htm


http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/Teaching/Design/kn-01.html

http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap6.html

http://is.asu.edu/workload/

http://math.uc.edu/onex/compare.html

Eastmond, D. V. 1992. Effective Facilitation of Computer Conferencing. Continuing HigherEducation Review. 56(1&2):23-34.

Eisley, M. 1991. Guidelines for conducting instructional discussions on a computer confer-ence. In Applications of Computer Conferencing to Teacher Education and HumanResource Development, ed. A. J. Miller, 35-39. Proceedings from an International Sympo-sium on Computer Conferencing at the Ohio State University, June 13-15.

Feenberg, A. 1986. Network design: An operating manual for computer conferencing.IEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 29(1):2-7.

Feenberg, A. 1989a. The written world: On the theory and practice of computer confer-encing. In Mindweave: Communications, Computers, and Distance Education, eds.R. Mason and A. Kaye, 22-39. Oxford: Pergamon Press. (http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap2.html)

Feenberg, A. 1989b. The planetary classroom: International applications of advancedcommunications to education. In Message Handling Systems and Distributed Applications,eds. E. Stefferud, O. J. Jacobsen, and P. Schicker, 511-524. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Feenberg, A. 1991. CMC in executive education: The WBSI experience. In Nordisk Kon-feranse om Fjernundervisning, Opplæring og Dataformidlet Kommunikasjon, eds. A. Fjuk,A. E. Jenssen, P. Helmersen, and M. Søby, 95-100. Proceeding from an InternationalConference at the University of Oslo, August 19-20.

Forsyth, D. R. 1990. Group Dynamics. Second Edition. Pacific Grove, Ca: Brooks/ColePublishing Company.

Hardy, V. 1993. Face to face and online tutoring: A different experience? In Teleteaching,eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 339-344. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteach-ing Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Harasim, L. 1989. On-line education: A new domain. In Mindweave: Communications,Computers, and Distance Education, eds. R. Mason and A. Kaye, 50-62. Oxford: Pergamon Press. (http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap4.html)

Hiltz, S. R. 1988. Teaching in a Virtual Classroom. Volume 2 of A Virtual Classroom onEIES: Final Evaluation Report. Newark, NJ: New Jersey Institute of Technology.

Holmberg, B. 1988. Guided didactic conversation in distance education. In DistanceEducation: International Perspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holmberg,114-122. London/New York: Routledge.

Houle, C. O. 1984. The design of education. In Selected Writings on Philosophy andAdult Education, ed. S. B. Merriam, 41-50. Malabar, Florida: Robert E. Krieger PublishingCompany.

Jarvis, P. 1987, ed. Twentieth Century Thinkers in Adult Education. London: Routledge.

Jensen, S. S. 1993. Organizational priority and prestige, differentiation and automation –factors of importance. In Proceedings of the Costel Workshop: Organization, Technologyand Economics of Education, 68-75. Copenhagen: Costel.

Johnson, E. 1993. Teaching on international computer networks. TEXT Technology 3(2):3-5.

Kaye, A. 1989. Computer-mediated communication and distance education. InMindweave: Communications, Computers, and Distance Education, eds. R. Mason and





A. Kaye, 3-21. Oxford: Pergamon Press. (http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap1.html)

Keegan, D. 1988. On defining distance education. In Distance Education: InternationalPerspectives, eds. D. Sewart, D. Keegan, and B. Holmberg, 6-33. London/New York:Routledge.

Kerr, E. B. 1986. Electronic leadership: A guide to moderating online conferences.IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications 29(1):12-18.

Mason, R. 1991. Moderating educational computer conferencing. DEOSNEWS 1(19).(www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews1_19.asp)

Mason, R. and T. Kaye. 1990. Toward a new paradigm for distance education. In OnlineEducation: Perspectives on a New Environment, ed. L. M. Harasim, 15-30. New York:Praeger.

Mason, R. 1990. Conferencing for mass distance education. 56-64. Proceedings from theThird Symposium on Computer Mediated Communication at the University of Guelph,Ontario, Canada, May 15-17.

Mason, R. 1998. Globalising Education. Trends and applications. New York, NY:Routledge.

Merriam, S. B. 1984 ed. Selected Writings on Philosophy and Adult Education. Malabar,Fl: Krieger.

Moore, M. G. 1990. Correspondence study. In Adult Learning Methods, ed. M. W.Galbraith, 345-365. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

Open University. 1997. Assessment. In Production Handbook for Open University Coursesand Packs. Milton Keynes. Section 31.0, pp. 1-4.(http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/management/teaching/ex-02.html)

Paulsen, M. F. 1992a. The NKI Electronic College: Five years of computer conferencing indistance education. In From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities: Distance Education,Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online Education, M. F. Paulsen, 2-17.University Park, Pennsylvania: The American Center for the Study of Distance Education.

Paulsen, M. F. 1992b. The hexagon of cooperative freedom: A distance education theoryattuned to computer conferencing. In From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities:Distance Education, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online Education, M. F.Paulsen, 56-64. University Park, Pa: The American Center for the Study of DistanceEducation.

Paulsen, M. F. 1998. Teaching Techniques for Computer-mediated Communication.Ann Arbor, Mi: UMI Dissertation Services.

Paulsen, M. F. and T. Rekkedal. 1990. The Electronic College: Selected Articles from theEKKO Project. Oslo: NKI Forlaget.

Rapaport, M. 1991. Computer Mediated Communications: Bulletin Boards, ComputerConferencing, Electronic Mail, and Information Retrieval. New York: John Wiley&Sons.

Rekkedal, T. 1999. Courses on the WWW - Student Experiences and Attitudes TowardsWWW Courses – II (www.nettskolen.com/pub/artikkel.xsql?artid=147)



http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/ http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap1.html

http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/ http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap1.html


http://wbweb4.worldbank.org/DistEd/management/teaching/ex-02.html

www.nettskolen.com/pub/artikkel.xsql?artid=147

Rekkedal, T. 1993. Experiences with computer conferencing and teleteaching at NKI,Norway. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 705-714. Proceedings of theIFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25August, 1993.

Stilborne, L. and L. Williams, 1996. Meeting the Needs of Adult Learners in DevelopingCourses for the Internet(www.isoc.org/isoc/whatis/conferences/inet/96/proceedings/c4/c4_2.htm)

Søby, M. 1992. Creating collaborative environments in education and training – Waitingfor Electropolis. A paper presented at the Nordic conference: The Third GenerationDistance Education at the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, January 24.

Thorpe, M. 1987. Student activities. Epistolodidactica, the European journal of distanceeducation 1987(2).

Turoff, M. 1982. The EIES educational experience. A paper presented in the ConferenceBriefs for the conference Telecommunications and Higher Education. New Jersey Institute ofTechnology, April 29, 1982.

Verner, C. 1964. Definition of terms. In Adult Education: Outlines of an Emerging Field ofUniversity Study, eds. G. Jensen, A. A. Liveright and W. Hallenback, 27-39. Washington,D.C.: Adult Education Association.

Weiss A. J., S. J. Agronow, G. J. Kuhns, D. D. Hengstler, 1994. Measuring Faculty Teach-ing Workload: Beyond Number of Courses Per Year.(www.cair.org/conferences/CAIR94/weiss.html)

Wells, R. 1992. Computer-Mediated Communication for Distance Education: An Inter-national Review of Design, Teaching, and Institutional Issues. University Park, Pennsylvania:The American Center for the Study of Distance Education.

Zinn, L. M. 1991. Identifying your philosophical orientation. In Adult Learning Methods,ed. M. W. Galbraith, 39-77. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.



www.isoc.org/isoc/whatis/conferences/inet/96/proceedings/c4/c4_2.htm

www.cair.org/conferences/CAIR94/weiss.html

Anecdote 2. Bjørn Helgeby:Online Trainer of the Year

In 1999, the NKI Internet College wanted to increase thefocus on excellence in online teaching and stimulate thediscussion among teachers, students, and staff regarding thecharacteristics of exemplary online teaching. To accomplish this,NKI decided to invite the students to elect the school’s best onlineteachers.

A jury comprised of two students and one staff memberwas established. The jury invited all students to nominate theirfavorite among the school’s 75 online teachers and give the

reasons for their nomination. On this basis, Bjørn Helgeby was honored as the best onlineteacher.

In its justification, the jury pointed out that Helgeby delivered swift, encouraging, andcomprehensive responses to student requests. He produced constructive, thorough feedbackwith both positive and critical comments on student assignments. He provided good studentsupport and inspired and motivated his students. He took active part in the discussion forumproviding advice and cues. He also received praise because he supplemented the read-ings with his own introductions.

Helgeby has worked as a full-time IT-consultant in Oslo since 1985. He is a father ofthree, living in Holmestrand, a small, costal town south of Oslo. He is also a part-timeonline teacher and does his teaching on the train during his two-hour daily commute.Helgeby taught about 150 students in an introductory course on information technology,and 100 students in a foundation course on programming. Information technology is hisspecialty and he benefits from it in his teaching.

Aboard the 4.39 pm train from Oslo, he opens his laptop and starts commenting on hisstudents’ assignments. He has developed an extensive database of useful comments andhelpful explanations. He skillfully merges adequate material from the database withpersonal advice to each student.

“I spend at least two and a half hours on the train every workday, so I want to do some-thing useful,” he says. “Frankly speaking, my time on the train is peaceful and quiet. Both athome and at work there is always someone who wants my attention. So, on the train, I canconcentrate on my students. I’m confident that they appreciate that I give them almostimmediate feedback. On the train, I reply all incoming messages twice a day.”

“The students may reach me via telephone, but they seldom do,” he says. “Almost allcommunication with individual students is via e-mail. This communication is obviouslydeprived of body language, facial expressions, and gestures. But the advantage is thatstudents come up with better-worded questions and I can concentrate on formulatingthorough and pedagogically structured feedback.”


“I have taught these NKI courses online since 1990, so I have answered 80 percent ofall questions earlier. Therefore I can retrieve most of my feedback from a comprehensivedatabase of comments that I have developed over the years. This makes my work veryefficient, and I’m sure that an inexperienced teacher would need much more time to teachthese courses.”


Online Teaching TechniquesThis article2 presents experiences with teaching techniques that were found in the literatureand that were recommended by some of the 150 online teachers that were interviewedabout their experiences with teaching techniques. The analysis of the interviews showedthat discussion groups, project groups, lectures, correspondence studies, and use of data-bases were the most used online teaching techniques.

Teaching Techniques in Adult EducationLiteratureThere is an abundance of literature describing techniques that can be used to facilitate adultlearning. A brief review of these techniques is included to identify techniques one may expectthat designers of CMC courses are familiar with and therefore would consider adapting toCMC. The books referred to in the following have been especially useful for the identificationof the techniques included in this review of adult education literature. In Adult Learning Meth-ods, edited by Galbraith (1990, 131-390), the following techniques were discussed indetail: learning contracts, lecture, discussion, mentorship, case study, nominal group tech-nique, demonstration and simulation, forum, panel and symposium, computer-enrichedinstruction, internship, and correspondence study. In Approaches to Training and DevelopmentLaird (1985, 129-168) described these techniques: lectures, readings, demonstrations, skits,field trips, note-taking, programmed instruction, panel discussion, structured discussions,panel discussions by students, topical discussions, question-answer panels, cognet, open-forum discussions, behavior modeling, interactive demonstrations, performance try-outs, brain-storming, case studies, action mazes, incident process, jigsaws, inbaskets, team tasks, buz-zgroups and syndicates, agenda-setting buzzgroups, role-plays, reverse role-plays, doublingrole-plays, rotation role-plays, finding metaphors, simulations, games, clinics, critical incident,fishbowls, t-groups, hot role-plays, and organization development data gathering. Compara-ble lists of techniques were presented by Knowles (1980, 239) and Knox (1987, 77-106).

In Effective Strategies for Teaching Adults, Seaman and Fellenz (1989, 25-145) discussedand categorized the techniques into techniques for presentation, action, and interaction. The



2 The article is based on my Online report on pedagogical techniques for CMC(www.nettskolen.com/pub/artikkel.xsql?artid=123). The original version, which was published in1995, has been used in several courses at universities around the world. It is my most referencedwork, and it has been translated to several languages with and without my knowledge. A Googlesearch reveals several hundred references to it.

www.studymentor.com

www.nettskolen.com/pub/artikkel.xsql?artid=123

presentation techniques included lecture, symposium, panel, dialogue, debate, demonstration,and interview; the action techniques comprised in-basket exercises, simulation games, role-plays, and case studies; and finally the interaction techniques included fishbowl, expandinggroups, buzz groups, brainstorming – including delphi and nominal group technique, listeningteams, audience reaction teams, colloquy, forum, committee, and committee hearing.

The techniques mentioned above are common in adult education, and the literature reviewhas shown that teachers and researchers have adapted these well-known techniques to onlineteaching and describe their experiences within this well-established paradigm of terms.

Teaching Techniques Discussed in CMCLiteratureArticles that give an overview of teaching techniques for CMC are more scarce than articlesthat discuss teaching techniques in general adult education. However, many descriptivearticles, presenting opinions on and experiences from one or a few CMC courses, includesome information about teaching techniques, but the issue is rarely pivotal. These articles arereferred to in the review of each technique. Just a few articles have been found that addressthe issue from a broader perspective. These articles are reviewed in the following section.

According to Henri (1988, 88) many educational applications of CMC can beimagined, such as: a) replying to queries and requests from students, b) providing adviceand guidance, c) helping students to solve problems with regard to the subject matter, d)serving as a transmission medium for homework and test papers, e) discussing projects andwork with the tutor, f) bringing students together in accordance with their interests and theirneeds, and g) encouraging team projects and setting up self-help groups.

A few authors have attempted to give a more detailed overview of the educational useof CMC systems (McCreary and Van Duren 1987, Harasim 1991 and 1992, Rekkedaland Paulsen 1989, Rekkedal 1990, and Kaye 1992). A closer examination of theirarticles revealed, though, that they are just preliminary attempts to cover the gamut ofteaching techniques that are available in CMC systems. An overview of the techniquesdiscussed in these articles is presented in Table 4 and explained in the following text.

Table 4. Overview of possible teaching techniques

McCreary and Van Duren (1987) Harasim (1991 and 1992)

The notice board SeminarsThe public tutorial Small group discussionsThe individual project Learning partnerships and dyadsFree flow discussion Small working groupsThe structured seminar Team presentations/moderating by learnersPeer counseling Simulations or role-playsCollective database Debating teamsGroup product Peer learning groupsCommunity decision making Informal socializing: the online cafeInter-community networking Mutual assist for help

Access to additional educational resources



Rekkedal and Paulsen (1989) Kaye (1992)

Distribution of information The virtual seminarTwo-way communication The online classroomAn alternative to face-to-face teaching Online games and simulationsThe public tutorial Computer-supported writing and learningPeer counseling Multi-media distance education adjunctFree flow discussion Lecture-room adjunctThe library The education utility

Teaching Techniques Discussed by McCreary and Van DurenBased on a study of applications of the CoSy conferencing system at the University ofGuelph, McCreary and Van Duren (1987, 108) identified the following ten educationalcomponents and functions of computer conferencing:1. The notice board. Conferences may have the same function as announcements in face-

to-face classes. The instructor can, for example, introduce office hours, class readings,assignment deadlines, material on reserve in the library, and examination advice. Theelectronic notice board is equally accessible to those who attended class and thosewho missed. It is permanently displayed and automatically marked with the date etc.Since it is interactive, it also allows for clarification of announcements. For administra-tive details, it offers advantages over announcements or handouts in face-to-faceclasses, as well as over students’ telephone calls and visits to the professor’s office.

2. The public tutorial. It is likely that if one student has a problem understanding or inter-preting, other students will share the problem. So, in order to benefit both inquirer andreaders, conferences have been used for questions and answers that can clarify issuesand elaborate on material presented in class. When issues are raised online, tutors aremore inclined to produce a detailed discussion knowing that it would not be necessaryto repeat the explanation for subsequent inquiries from other students.

3. The individual project. An online conversation between two participants can be useful insituations such as rewriting a term paper, guiding an independent reading course, orwriting a thesis proposal. Online supervision may be slower than direct spoken consul-tation. On the other hand, it may be more thoughtful and more productive use of con-tact time.

4. Free flow discussion. A free flow discussion conference may be used to continue andsupplement interaction in a face-to-face class. Participants can pursue ideas betweenclasses after they have read further and reflected on the issues. For example, free flowdiscussion conferences have been used successfully for informal reflection on a futurestheme. The discussion does not need to be inconclusive or aimless since any partici-pant can focus on a series of comments and test group consensus.

O N L I N E T E A C H I N G T E C H N I Q U E S


5. The structured seminar. In a structured seminar, sub-topics have been matched to units ofcourse material. This is particularly useful for distance learners and individuals whohave incoherent course progress.

6. Peer counseling. Conferences for peer counseling are primarily for student-to-student inter-action. These conferences provide a medium for mutual support and advice on aca-demic issues such as exam preparation, administrative aspects concerning registrationprocedures and fees, existential crises related to work on thesis proposals, and how tosurvive as a part-time student. Although peer counseling takes place in conferences withother purposes, its function is important enough to merit a separate conference orinclusion as a separate topic in a course conference.

7. Collective database. Collective databases; such as annotated bibliographies, listings ofjournals, directories of sources for scholarships, and calendars of events, can be estab-lished within computer conferencing systems. Conferencing systems provide a meansfor soliciting and collecting contributions from individuals.

8. Group product. Conference systems can facilitate group work such as case study pre-paration, project development, and team presentation. Conferences can further provideforums in which classes can analyze problems, coordinate individual work, preparegroup papers, and review and revise each other’s work.

9. Community decision-making. A conference open for all students, faculty, and staff canaddress management of educational resources, procedures for comprehensive examsand thesis defenses, curriculum changes, and preferences among nominees for visitingfaculty. Especially at the graduate level, shared decision-making is beneficial in build-ing true academic communities.

10.Inter-community networking. Linkages between similar academic groups at different univer-sities have been attempted to promote common research and scholarly interests. Thisseems to work best among people with previously established relations through on-siteconferences, shared study interests, or exchange of papers.

Teaching Techniques Discussed by HarasimBased on her work with CMC courses at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education andat the Simon Fraser University, Harasim (1991 and 1992) offers eleven learning tech-niques that have been found effective online. Her presentation of these techniques is para-phrased in the following:1. Seminars. In online seminars, students prepare by reading the assigned material before they

log on to discuss pivotal issues with peers and instructors in an appropriate conference.2. Small group discussions. In small group discussions, three to ten users discuss a particular

topic, usually guided by an instructor or a group leader. The discussion often follows aseminar discussion or a plenary discussion. It may also complement a parallel face-to-face or online activity.

3. Learning partnerships and dyads. In learning partnerships and dyads, learners are pairedfor mutual support and group work. These techniques can serve as icebreakers in earlyphases of online classes and they are also useful for joint writing projects.



4. Small working groups. Small working groups can facilitate collaborative work. Studentgroups can, for example, solve problems, undertake research projects, and writereports. Effective groups, though, require clearly defined tasks, roles, and timeliness.

5. Team presentations/moderating by the learners. Online students can be asked to moder-ate class discussions and to present papers in a computer conference. Students may,for example, work in small groups to present, moderate, critique, and synthesize adiscussion on a class topic.

6. Simulations or role-plays. Simulations and role-plays allow students to apply and test theo-retical knowledge in a simulated environment. Examples of successful role-plays inonline environments include a “management lab”, an “evaluation manor”, and “Sam’sCafé”. In the management lab, students take on various roles in managing a hypothe-tical corporation. In the evaluation manor, learners assume the perspectives of variousevaluators to debate evaluation procedures and approaches. Finally, in Sam’s Cafe,the participants adopt the personae of characters in a bar to explore different philo-sophical perspectives and positions.

7. Debating teams. In debating teams, learners have the opportunity to improve theiranalytical and communication skills by formulating ideas, defending positions, andcritiquing counter positions.

8. Peer learning groups. In peer learning groups, learners assist one another with writingassignments, problem solving, etc. Students may, for example, collaborate online toimprove their writing skills.

9. Informal socializing: the online cafe. Since social communication is an essential compo-nent of educational activity, online educational environments should provide opportuni-ties for informal discourse. An online cafe can contribute to a sense of community amongthe users, forging a social bond that may offer motivational and cognitive benefits.

10.Mutual assistance for help. Valuable online support, based on mutual assistance, can beorganized in an online conference where students can ask one another for help. Sucha conference may be especially useful with regard to technical problems and systemsupport.

11.Access to additional educational resources. Additional online resources for educationaluse include international networks, databases, library catalogues, and informationpools. To benefit the curriculum, these resources could be an integral part of the onlineactivities.

Teaching Techniques Discussed by Rekkedal and PaulsenBased on literature review and research on computer conferencing courses at NKI in Oslo,Rekkedal and Paulsen (1989, 64) identified seven areas where computer conferencing canbe applied in distance learning systems. Their accounts are paraphrased in the following:1. Distribution of information. Distance teaching systems need to increase the efficiency of

distributing and updating information to students, faculty, and staff. Computer con-ferencing can, for example, be used for distribution of updated learning materials andinformation about courses, seminars, examinations, and student activities.



2. Two-way communication between student, tutor and staff. In most distance teaching sys-tems, submission of assignments for correction, evaluation, and feedback is important.Research shows that extended turnaround times may have destructive effects on coursecompletion. It often takes too long for students to get help when they encounter prob-lems in their studies. To some extent, telephone support has been used in these situa-tions, but computer conferencing systems function more conveniently. Students may, forexample, ask questions at any time, without the time delay of land mail. Draft solutionsmay be discussed, introducing a more flexible organization of tutoring and assessment.Student answers may be made available to other students, before or after submissiondeadline. Computer-scored tests can also be included in online systems, as a substitutefor traditional off-line computer scoring. In higher-level education, two-way communi-cation by e-mail may be used in the guidance of individual student projects.

3. An alternative to face-to-face teaching, introduction of group discussion and project work.Many distance education programs include occasional face-to-face meetings betweentutors and students, but practical or geographical considerations restrict many studentsfrom taking part in these meetings. Sometimes, face-to-face meetings develop into one-way presentation of subject matter. Computer conferencing, on the other hand, mainlyinvolves information exchange and interpersonal discussion. Electronic classroomdiscussions can develop into exciting experiences of group learning. In the same vein,the medium seems to foster equality of status between the participants. Finally, specialgroup-learning techniques – such as group submission of assignments, group learningand presentations, seminars, and project work – may be applied.

4. The public tutorial. Most distance education systems are designed for individual learning,but communication between one tutor and a number of individual learners is time-consuming. Questions, answers, and comments from one student will, however, oftenbe of relevance to others. In a conferencing system, such interaction could be madeaccessible to all students along with pre-produced information of general interest.

5. Peer counseling. Informal peer counseling and cooperation are regular activities in on-campus programs. In computer conferencing, the possibilities for such collaboration areobvious and actively supported in the majority of learning programs. Peer help insolving problems may often come from an unknown friend. Peer counseling may be ofparticular value in large-scale systems where hundreds of learners are studying thesame subject.

6. Free flow discussion. A number of educational conferencing systems have establishedsocial conferences, such as the cafe, the pub, or the coffee shop. These conferenceshave shown that informal discussions and non-academic activities can thrive in edu-cational conferencing systems.

7. The library. In an online text database, articles, lectures, research reports, etc. can bemade available to the students.



Teaching Techniques Discussed by KayeIn a literature review paper on collaborative learning, Kaye (1992) described the followingseven applications of CMC in education and training programs:

1. The virtual seminar. The International Executive Forum organized by the WesternBehavioral Sciences Institute (WBSI) in La Jolla, California, from 1982 to 1991 isparadigmatic of the virtual seminar model. In this model, a small group of articulatepeers exchange ideas and information over several months. The high quality and valueof the online discussion is evident even from a retrospective analysis of the conferencetranscripts (Mason 1991).

2. The online classroom. Applications of the online classroom model have often beeninspired by the “virtual classroom” research carried out at the New Jersey Institute ofTechnology (Hiltz 1990). Now, there are three common features of most online class-rooms. First, the group size is comparable to that in a face-to-face class. Second, thereis at least one person responsible for guiding the group’s activities and, third, computerconferencing represents the principal mode of communication. Varieties of online class-rooms depend on the age of student groups, the educational levels, and the roles takenby the people responsible for the groups.

3. Online games and simulations. The online game or simulation is a variety of the onlineclassroom, which merits further development, since it can build on computer processing inaddition to computer conferencing. Examples of such simulations are the “virtual manage-ment practices laboratory” (Hsu 1990) at the New Jersey Institute of Technology and theArab-Israeli conflict simulation (Goodman 1992) at the University of Michigan.

4. Computer-supported writing and language learning. Since the combination of CMC andword processors essentially has a textual nature, it has attracted interest within the fieldof the teaching of writing and language skills. Examples include Connected Education’screative writing courses and Rio Salado Community College’s courses in creativewriting, technical writing, and English composition.

5. Multi-media distance education adjunct. There appear to be strong arguments for introduc-ing CMC into multi-media distance education programs in addition to print, broadcast,educational software, correspondence, telephone, and face-to-face meetings. E-mail canprovide more regular and faster communication between students and tutors. Conferencesprovide a means for group discussions and interactive learning; communication amongststudents, tutors, and course development and support staff, and opportunities for socializ-ing and cooperation amongst students. Online databases can provide access to referenceand library resources. Two examples of multi-media distance education providers are theBritish Open University (Mason 1989 and Thomas 1989) and EuroPACE.

6. Lecture-room adjunct. In large on-campus lecture classes, there is little time for individualstudents to ask questions and the format does not invite discussion. In such a context, universi-ties may establish conferences where students can get help from teachers and other students.

7. The education utility. The education utility is a set of online resources that students andfaculty can access. The Campus 2000 system, run by British Telecom and Times



Newspapers, is one system that provides schools and further education colleges withaccess to databases, computer-based training material, international e-mail, and acomputer conferencing system. Campus 2000 hosts some distance educationprograms and many intercultural networking projects.

Framework for Online TeachingTechniquesA teaching technique is a manner of accomplishing teaching objectives. The techniquesare organized according to the four communication paradigms used in computer-mediatedcommunication. The paradigms are information retrieval, electronic mail, bulletin boards,and computer conferencing. The classification is derived from Rapaport (1991) who uses itin his book; Computer Mediated Communications: Bulletin Boards, Computer Conferencing,Electronic Mail, and Information Retrieval. Additional support for this classification is found ina paper by Harasim (1989). Presenting “the Collaborative Learning Horizon”, she distin-guished among one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many learning approaches.

The foregoing considerations result in a framework of four classes of techniques asshown in Table 5. First, the techniques classified as one-online are characterized byretrieval of information from online resources and the fact that a student can perform thelearning task without communication with the teacher or other students. Second, the tech-niques classified as one-to-one can be conducted via e-mail applications. Third, the tech-niques discussed as one-to-many will typically be conducted via bulletin boards or distri-bution lists for e-mail. Finally, the techniques presented as many-to-many can be organizedwithin computer conferencing systems, bulletin board systems, or distribution lists for e-mail.

Table 5. Framework for online teaching techniques

One-online Techniques One-to-many TechniquesOnline databases LecturesOnline journals SymposiumsOnline applications SkitsSoftware librariesOnline interest groups Many-to-many TechniquesInterviews Debates

Simulations or gamesOne-to-one Techniques Role-playsLearning contracts Case studiesApprenticeships Discussion groupsInternships Transcript based assignmentsCorrespondence studies Brainstorming

Delphi techniquesNominal group techniquesForumsProject groups



One-online Techniques: The Online Resource Paradigm

This section describes techniques that utilize online resources. Theresources may be information (online databases and online jour-nals), software (online applications and software libraries), or people(online interest groups and individual experts). Teachers can employtechniques that utilize these resources via CMC. The techniques may

be more or less structured, but they all require minimal interactive participation by theteacher.

Discussing CMC and student self-directed learning, Seaton (1993, 52) argued that thepotential of CMC lies in its ability to provide a gateway to resources, collaborative learn-ing, and individual achievement. He further stated that although CMC is neither a neces-sary nor a sufficient component to develop self-directed learning, it increases the possibilitythat such learning can take place at a distance.

The last of Harasim’s eleven group-learning activities is access to additional educationalresources. In her explanation, she stated: “Most university computer conferencing systemsprovide access to other online resources such as international networks... as well as accessto online databases, library catalogues, and similar information pools. These resourcescould be integrated into the design of online activities to benefit the curriculum.” (Harasim1992, iii)

Howse (1991) presented another description of online resources in his article Internet -The discoveries of a distance educator. He discussed the following Internet resources withrelevance to distance educators: e-mail, newsgroups, distribution lists, library systems, elec-tronic journals, databases, and remote software applications. In his conclusion, Howse(1991) stated that “Access to information and computing power, and use of this access,will not only enhance learning but it will empower those who have these skills. Distanceeducators should explore the Internet. Better still, they can use the network to help theirstudents.”

This was supported by Wells (1993, 85) who stated that “the array of resources avail-able through the Internet is expanding at a dizzying rate with the result that increasedaccess to remote library catalogs, online databases, and other material will immeasurablyenrich the academic experience for all students.”

The Canadian Southern Interior Telecommunication Project (SITP), described by Telesand Duxbury (1991), is one early example of a project with advanced use of onlineresources. The project was initiated by eleven school districts in British Columbia in early1989, and the objective was to improve the educational system in the region by providingmore resources to support the teaching and learning process through appropriate use ofonline resources. Representing 82 elementary and secondary schools, 359 teachers (andtheir classes), librarians, and staff joined the project. The participants were given access toe-mail via Bitnet and Internet, various computer conferencing systems in Canadian and U.S.institutions, and online databases such as Grolier, ERIC, and the Simon Fraser University



Library database. Online experts were available to the participants. In addition, twoaccounts for Dialog, the News$ource, the Web, and the AT& T Learning Circle were givento each district (Teles and Duxbury 1991, 12). According to Teles and Duxbury (1991,50), the most used resources were “electronic mail, followed by computer conferencing,and databases....The primary use of CMC was to support peer communication and profes-sional development, and to enhance curriculum-based classroom activities”. They furtherconcluded that the reported impact on students, as perceived by the teachers, was greateraccess to information, increased enthusiasm, more opportunities to collaborate in largergroups, and increased incorporation of real life experience into classroom activities. Finally,the authors (Teles and Duxbury 1991, 50) report that the majority of the participants were“highly positive and enthusiastic about the project, for enhancing teaching and learningactivities”.

Online DatabasesOnline databases are organized collections of data that can be accessed via CMC.Utilizing these resources, a course provider can maintain local databases of relevance toboth students and faculty. An easier solution than maintaining local databases is to provideaccess to external databases. A growing number of such databases are now available viaCMC networks. At Murdoch University, Howse (1991) stated the directory of libraryservices that are accessible via Internet is seventy pages long. In the same way, studentsand faculty at the Ohio State University had access to at least nine major libraries and anumber of databases via the Internet (Dixon 1991). CompuServe users can access theAcademic American Encyclopedia, Dissertation Abstracts, ERIC, Magazine Database Plus,and Peterson’s College Database. In an article on library services to off-campus students,Bazillion and Braun (1992) argued that the online library catalogue for the Brandon,Manitoba, and Saskatchewan Universities provided a way to teach research skills to alltheir online students. A paper describing the UK Open University online database waspresented by Melton and Ismail (1993).

Online JournalsOnline journals are periodicals that are available to readers via CMC networks. They areincreasingly important resources for information and learning. Supporting this statement,U.S.News & World Report (1994, 60) claimed that more than 2,700 newspapersexperimented with one or another kind of electronic venture in 1994 compared to only 42in 1989. Strangelove (1992) compiled a directory of about 35 electronic journals and 90newsletters that were available via the Internet. Utilizing these resources, teachers haveencouraged and helped students to subscribe to online journals and to use them as anintegral part of a course or as a supplement to course work. In a paper considering CMC’spotential for pre-service and in-service teacher education, Marantz and England (1993,76) stated that they used the electronic journals DEOSNEWS and NETWEAVER as up-to-date and accessible educational resources. Gunawardena (1992, 63), describing herexperiences from a graduate course on the theory and practice of distance education at



the University of New Mexico, stated that the students found DEOSNEWS and the On-lineJournal of Distance Education and Communication to be invaluable resources for theirresearch papers.

Online ApplicationsOnline applications are software programs that can be executed on a remote computer viaa computer network. The remote session may be established using for example a modemconnection or the Internet Telnet service. The online applications include a range of appli-cations from software development tools, via specific applications for statistics, economicanalysis, and so on, to computer-aided instruction (CAI) applications. The following twoexamples present early experiments from the NKI Electronic College described by Paulsen(1992a).

As a part of the Introduction to Computer Science course, Lindland used the EKKOonline multiple-choice database (EKKO-base) for the first time in the fall of 1989. Thestudents could download a number of multiple-choice questions, then spend the time theyneeded to figure out the answers, and finally upload their responses for automatic scoring.EKKO-base is further described by Quale (1990 and 1991). In another trial at the NKIElectronic College, Børsum taught a programming course that allowed the students toaccess the host computer’s Cobol compiler. Although it was more convenient to use a localPC-compiler, the experiment showed that remote students can access host computer appli-cations, such as compilers, software for statistical analysis, and tools for the development ofdatabases.

Hiltz and Turoff (1978, 309 and 310) contended that CAI has suffered from a lack ofthe incorporation of structured communications and that it will require the integration of CAIsystems with computer conferencing systems to allow the encompassing of the total educa-tional process. In an article on integrating CAI with computer conferencing, Lauzon (1992)described how VITAL, a computerized course authoring system, was utilized together withthe TCoSy conferencing system in a communication process course at the University ofGuelph. Online, students just selected VITAL or TCoSy from a menu. Five VITAL multiplechoice quizzes provided immediate feedback to the learners. Each quiz was availableonline for about three weeks and the students had three chances to pass the quiz. Thequizzes were designed to facilitate lower-level learning to prepare students for higher-levellearning in the conferencing system. In conclusion, Lauzon (1992, 44) reported that theevaluation suggested that instruction provided via CAI and computer conferencing canengender positive attitudes toward computers and communication technology.

Kaye (1991, 43) mentioned the French insurance company, Union des Assurances deParis, as an early example of a corporation that has provided CAI via the company’snational computer network. The employees can, both from home and work, access CAImaterial to study French, English, mathematics, physics, information technology, law, eco-nomics, and insurance. Kaye (1991, 48) further stated that a combination of CAI materialaccessible via the Alitalia airline’s computer network, self-study texts, and so on, has cut thecosts of face-to-face training programs by 70 percent.



Software LibrariesIn addition to accessing remote online applications, students may download applicationprograms from remote software libraries so that they later can execute the programs ontheir PCs. Such application programs are available from a number of host computers. TheInternet provides a standardized file transfer protocol (FTP) to obtain copies of softwareapplications, and a large number of the popular PC-based bulletin board systems have soft-ware exchange as their main activity. One way to apply such resources in education is toprovide online software libraries with relevant educational software for the students. Boston(1992) wrote that the Houston Community College System in several courses providedcourseware that students could download and study off-line. He (Boston 1992, 50) espe-cially mentioned the use of courseware in teaching history, economics, and data communi-cations. The history and data communications courseware was designed by the courseinstructors while the economics courseware was provided by the publisher of the textbook.Some faculty, however, resisted developing courseware because it required more workthan they got paid for. Referring to his personal and professional growth experience as ateacher, Boston (1992, 57) concluded that: “One feels the renewal and satisfaction thatcomes from creating new courseware, from improving it, and from seeing it used success-fully by students miles away, students who are themselves thrilled to be learning this way.”

Online Interest GroupsAn online interest group (OIG) is a group of people with a common interest who convenevia CMC. There are thousands of OIGs that can be accessed via international CMC net-works, and it can be argued that they all have some sort of educational use. Howse(1992) stated that more than 1,000 scholarly lists are distributed via Listserv on the Internetand that over 1,000 international newsgroups, carrying more than 250,000 items everyday, can be accessed at Murdoch University.

There are many documented examples of CMC-based OIGs that are relevant for educa-tion. Bull, Harris, and Drucker (1992) described experiences from the electronic academicvillage in the Curry School of Education at the University of Virginia, U.S.A. The electronicvillage was based on a CMC system that linked teachers in the public schools, students inthe teacher education program, and faculty at the University. In addition, the system linkedthe participants to teachers across the nation and in other countries. The system providedan OIG environment in which people could exchange thoughts and ideas.

Friedman and McCullough (1992) presented a project linking English teachers fromseven rural high schools in the United States. The OIG was organized as a computer con-ference at the Bread Loaf School of English. Pierce (1992) explained how CompuServeand BITNET have been used worldwide by researchers in education. The purpose of theseOIGs was to facilitate communication among researchers who wanted to share and com-pare findings about education and to communicate with consumers of research in educa-tion. Braatane (1993) presented Teachers in Network, a BBS-based cluster of OIGs, opento all teachers in Norwegian secondary education and sponsored by the NorwegianMinistry of Education. Stewart (1993, 859) reported use of OIGs in the Schools Sharing



Information Network in New Zealand. Odasz (1992) described the Big Sky TelegraphCMC system that linked one-room schools in rural Montana, U.S.A. The mission of thesystem was to empower rural residents through the sharing of knowledge access skillsamong rural teachers. These accounts show that access to OIGs obviously has been ofvalue to students in teacher education programs.

InterviewsAn interview was described by Seaman and Fellenz (1989, 70) as: “a presentation inwhich an interviewer asks questions of one or possibly two resource persons before anaudience. The resource persons are knowledgeable about a previously determined topic ofinterest to the audience and should have been informed about the kinds of questions thatwill be asked, especially those that will open the interview. Questions may be prepared inadvance, improvised by the interviewer as the activity progresses, submitted to the inter-viewer on small cards by members of the audience, or a combination of the above.”

Etzkowitz (1989) reviewed e-mail as a communication and interviewing medium. Hisarticle discussed an experiment in using e-mail in qualitative social research in which theface-to-face focused interview was adapted for electronic use. The article presented theconcept of the focused interview and its electronic adaptation as well as a comparisonbetween e-mail and face-to-face focused interviews. Etzkowitz concluded that the e-mailinterview combines characteristics from both formal and informal interviewing techniquesand that it: “is emerging as a hybrid of the structured written questionnaire, the focusedinterview, the anthropologist-informant relationship and the longitudinal panel study”(Etzkowitz 1989, 531).

An example of an online interview was presented by Paulsen (1992e). In the introduc-tion to the interview he described how the interview was conducted via the Internet:

This interview with Bruce Scriven, program chair of the 16th ICDE World Confer-ence, was conducted via e-mail. The first set of questions was posted in January.In February, a second round of questions was posted to clarify and elaborate onthe questions and answers. Finally, after the additional information from thesecond announcement flier was included, the interview was dispatched to BruceScriven for approval. Except for some technical problems with lost messages, thiswas an interesting experience using an interview technique that can be recom-mended. Paulsen (1992e)

A more concrete example of an educational application of an interview could be togive the students the following assignment: Each of the small groups could conduct ane-mail interview, focusing on a topic that is relevant to the course, and post the interview tothe class.



One-to-one Techniques: The E-mail Paradigm

The techniques included in this section are learning contracts,apprenticeships, internships, and correspondence studies. Thesetechniques are characterized by a one-to-one relationship andby individualized teaching and learning. The teaching andlearning are facilitated in the communication process. So, com-puter-mediated communication can be an effective support for

these techniques when the communication can be conveyed by written text. On the otherhand, one may contend that some of these techniques depend so much on personal rela-tionships that frequent face-to-face meetings may be necessary.

Learning ContractsA learning contract is a technique that can be used to individualize the learning process.According to O’Donnell and Caffarella (1990, 134), it is “a formal agreement written bya learner which details what will be learned, how the learning will be accomplished, theperiod of time involved, and the specific evaluation criteria to be used in judging the com-pletion of the learning.”

Marantz and England described their experiences at Empire State College with a learn-ing contract carried out via CMC:

Not only was none of the value of face-to-face contract mode lost, but much morewas added. Online together, we developed a learning contract, “Telecommunica-tion in Education: exploring the future,” and carried the study to completion usingall capabilities of the medium - e-mail, Bitnet communication, database file trans-fer, a Caucus conference, and Phone “chat” - in a way that enhanced learning foreach of us. It involved close reading, intensive discussions and critical argument,a broadly ranging survey of users, and the development of three substantivepapers. We found that by maximizing CMC strengths and identifying potentialshortcomings, this electronic “distance” study achieved at least as much, and oftenmore, than what face-to-face tutorials provide by way of “close” collaboration andmeaningful mutual learning. (Marantz and England, 1992)

ApprenticeshipsAn apprentice is a learner of a trade who has agreed to work for a number of years inreturn for being taught. Levin, Haesun, and Riel (1990, 211) stated: “Patterns that we’veobserved in instructional electronic network interactions resemble those described in face-to-face apprenticeships.... Thus we may see emerging a new pattern, ‘teleapprenticeships’,with some of the properties of face-to-face apprenticeships.”



The skills to be learned by online apprentices are predominantly cognitive in nature. Inan article discussing cognitive apprenticeship on global networks, Teles (1993, 271)stated that “Online apprenticeship, also called teleapprenticeship, refers to apprenticeshipmediated by access to masters and peers on computer networks.... In this environment,online apprentices can build and share knowledge through goal-oriented learning interac-tions with peers, experts, and mentors, and through full-time access to specialized sourcesof information” He further illustrated mentorship and peer collaboration as two approachesto online apprenticeship. In the following, mentorship and peer collaboration is discussedin more detail.

Mentorship: A mentor is a wise and trusted advisor and helper to an inexperiencedperson. Daloz (1990, 223) stated that effective mentorship is akin to “guiding the studenton a journey at the end of which the student is a different and more accomplished person.In a formal learning situation, mentoring functions can be understood as variously providingsupport, challenge, and vision.”

For more than a year, Kort (1991) corresponded by e-mail with a disadvantaged seven-year-old boy in Atlanta. With an average of two letters per week, the transcripts of thecorrespondence filled a one-inch binder. The exchange format, similar to a Socratic dia-logue, was intended to engage the boy in an exploration of scientific material. Kort statedthat the boy’s literacy and communication skills improved dramatically as his scholarship,attitude toward school, and self-confidence progressed from problematic to exemplary.

Teles (1993, 274) stated that many literature and creative writing classes in Canadaprovide students with access to online mentors, such as poets, authors, and English profes-sors. In one example, a student submitted a class assignment poem to a professional writer,newspaper columnist, and English professor and asked this mentor for stylistic improve-ments. The request initiated a one month learning interaction of suggestions, responses,and revisions that resulted in a poem improved in prose, images, and rhythm.

Peer collaboration: An illustrative example of peer collaboration apprenticeship inDigital’s corporate network was provided by Gundry:

... that conferencing networks offer the potential for learning outside formal educa-tional channels was brought home to me in the case of a young man who worksin our group. This man is 21, and is a specialist in VAX system management,hypermedia, and DECwindows/Motif programming. He joined us four years agohaving completed a Digital-sponsored information technology awareness coursein the local town, after leaving school at 15 with almost no qualifications. Virtuallyeverything about his specialties that he has learned since he joined Digital hascome from participation in conferences. He has attended a couple of formal train-ing courses, but he has gained most of his expertise through conferencing. Whenhe has encountered a work-related problem that he cannot solve himself, his firstreaction is to consult the network, and then to search and research for the answeror for someone who can tell him the answer. (Gundry 1992, 173)



Mason (1993, 577) reported that the final assignment at the Online Education and Train-ing course at the Open University included a peer-assessment exercise. The plan was togive potential online teachers experience of marking online work, but there was a generalrevolt against the idea of peer-assessment. According to Mason, two possible reasons forthis could be that the students had reached their limits of experimental tolerance or that theyresisted more self-directed work.

Teles (1993, 277) related Writers’ Link, a program where grade four students wrote shortstories and submitted them to online peers for revision. Review groups of three to five studentsgave feedback to the authors. With the support of their classroom teachers, the reviewersidentified several aspects of the stories that should be praised and criticized. Through thisprocess, both authors and reviewers learned about revision and sentence structures.

Tillyer (1993) described his experience with e-mail pen pals to be very satisfying. Tillyerenlisted a group of sociology students from Arizona State University as pen pals for hisupper level English as a second language (ESL) writing class at City College of New York.The ESL class used a cultural anthropology reader as the text and the sociology students asconsultants. Tillyer concluded that e-mail was satisfying to the students because it allowedthem to write something that was meaningful both to themselves and to their pen pals.

Dagiene (1993) reported on peer reviews of computer code in a project of distanceteaching of Informatics at the Lithuanian Young Programmers School. In this project, theteam solutions to a programming assignment were distributed to all teams for examinationand evaluation. Each team was asked to choose some of the solutions for detailed exami-nation and evaluation according to a given set of rules. Dagiene concluded that distribu-tion of the solutions ensured cooperation among distance students.

InternshipsInternship is a technique allowing students to practice a future profession under the guid-ance and supervision of qualified professionals. Presenting the experiences with interna-tional electronic communication projects at Preston College, in the United Kingdom,O’Donoghue (1993, 637) reported that he introduced student-centered in-service trainingto reduce faculty workload. Reporting from the experiences teaching an upper secondarybiology course in Norway, Sande and Eide (1993) stated that computer conferencingfacilitates the use of students as assistant teachers. They further stated that the studentteacher scheme worked very well and that the students looked forward to their weeklyteaching assignments.

Wired, a California-based magazine, announced an online internship this way: “If youlove net.stuff, are Unix literate, and want to help us migrate Wired from paper to electrons,this internship is for you. Lousy pay, fabulous opportunities. Please send resume and refer-ences to: [email protected] (no snail-mail, fax, or carrier pigeon submissions,please).” (Wired 1994, 70)



Correspondence StudiesOne definition of correspondence study was suggested by Moore (1990, 346): “Corre-spondence study is that form of distance education in which the learning is directed orfacilitated through communications in print and in writing, although these communicationsmight be supplemented by other media.”

Comparing traditional correspondence assignments with online correspondence assign-ments at NKS in Norway, Fjuk (Fjuk and Jenssen 1992, 6 and Fjuk 1992, 34) reportedthat online correspondence may be faster and that it has the potential to be more efficient ifthe teachers utilize modified standard response files. However, teachers with experiencefrom traditional correspondence courses complained about inconvenient procedures for filetransfer and a lack of possibilities to annotate and comment with “red ink”. The sameobservation was offered by Kaye (1989, 17). He stated that in written correspondencetuition tutors should evaluate, annotate, and grade written work submitted by students.Hence, there are certain advantages to using paper - students receive their work back withthe tutor’s comments and annotations against the relevant parts of the text. When assign-ments are submitted electronically, current CMC systems require the student’s text to besliced into a series of discrete messages so that the tutor can include text-based comments.

The Electronic University Network (EUN) provided a framework of communication serv-ices and administrative procedures for organizations that offered distance educationcourses online. Courses and programs from several traditional colleges and universitieswere available through the EUN. The EUN did not provide computer conferencing forgroup communication, just e-mail for one-to-one communication between the student and histutor. For each course, the students received Protege, a software package comprising com-munication software, a text editor, and a course-specific module. The tutors used anothersoftware package called Mentor. The EUN lacked group communication facilities. Withoutthese, the EUN may be regarded as a distance education organization that had upgradedtraditional correspondence courses to more immediate e-mail courses. (Electronic UniversityNetwork 1991)

Hoffman (1993, 393) described the following six kinds of e-mail feedback that wereused in second language professional courses at the City Polytechnic of Hong Kong.1) Response to questions about assignments, 2) teacher comments inserted in passages inwhich students asked for critique, 3) teacher comments inserted in assigned drafts, 4) elaboration on responses to questions, 5) information for individuals or groups ofstudents, and 6) summative comments and grades. Comparing face-to-face teaching ande-mail, Hoffman concluded that e-mail appeared to produce more effective and expandedfeedback for students, fuller exploitation of the principles of process writing, and greatersatisfaction for teachers and students.



One-to-many Techniques: The Bulletin Board Paradigm

The techniques discussed in this section arecharacterized by presentation to students by oneor more individual experts or by interactingexperts. The learners are usually not invited totake part in the interaction, so the communicationis typically conducted in a conference or bulletin

board system where students have read only access. The techniques discussed are lecture,symposium, and skits.

LecturesIn a concise description of a lecture, Knox (1987, 87) stated that a lecturer is an “expert[who] presents participants with an organized in-depth presentation, often accompanied byaudiovisuals and questions and answers.”

In a CMC system, a lecture could be presented as text posted to a bulletin board. Itcould take the form of complete articles, excerpts of articles, study guides, outlines, or state-ments that prepare later discussions. The technique could be especially useful when a guestexpert is invited to contribute to a part of a course.

A very early example of an online lecture was described by Hiltz (1985, 11) whoconducted an intensive “electure” (electronic lecture) for about 100 participants on theSource in the Fall 1982. The lecture was presented in sections of one to two pages each,and one section was added each day for a week. Each segment was followed byballoting and discussion. After the experiment, the evaluators concluded that the “electurer”tended to take a less dominant role than a face-to-face lecturer, and that computer confer-encing made the post-electure interaction less of a question-and-answer period and more ofa free-for-all discussion.

In a study of conferences at NKS in Norway, Johnsen (1992, 88) described the use oflecture conferences. The best example was the Public Administration conference, whichhad just 26 notes; the teacher posted 18, and the ten students posted the remaining 8.The lecturer dominated the conference completely, posting contributions that were severalpages long every second week. The total number of lines posted to this conferenceequaled another conference with 170 notes.

In an article describing his experiences in teaching three computer programming coursesfor the humanities via Bitnet, Johnson (1993) found that the students had to be allowed towork at their own pace. He uploaded all lectures, data files, exercises, and solutions ontoa network listserver and allowed the students to retrieve them whenever they preferred. Inconclusion, Johnson (1993, 5) stated that “there is no doubt that it is worthwhile to offercourses such as Computer Programming for the Humanities via computer networks becausestudents can thus complete classes that would not be available to them in any other way.”

Harasim (1987, 132) argued, though, that delivering lectures online is awkward,



because it requires instructors to write and students to read much text on a screen. Hence,online lectures would not likely be attractive to students or instructors. As the technology hasimproved, more and more lecturers publish their PowerPoint slide presentations on theWeb. Some have also started to publish audio- and video recordings of their lectures onthe Web.

SymposiumsSisco (1990, 285) defined a symposium as “a series of presentations given by two to fivepersons of notable authority and competence on different aspects of the same theme orclosely related themes. The symposium tends to be formal in nature because of the authori-tative presentations. However, once the presentations are given, questions are encouragedand accepted. Rarely do the invited speakers converse with one another and almost neverdoes one of them interrupt another during the formal presentation of ideas. A program chairtypically organizes the symposium and is in charge of the actual proceedings.”

The Bangkok Project (Anderson 1993, Anderson and Mason 1993) was organized as apre-conference to the 16th ICDE World Conference on Distance Education held in Novem-ber 1992 in Bangkok, Thailand. The project was an experimental venture aiming to link dis-tance educators on all major electronic networks. Presenting the project, Anderson explained:

“Six internationally renowned scholars volunteered to serve as ‘First Speakers’.The First Speakers started each of the 6 topics by uploading 5-7 screens of infor-mation and issues for discussion. A volunteer host served each topic discussion asfacilitator and moderator. The information provided by the First Speakers, as wellas subsequent questions, comments and rebuttals was distributed across a groupof between 20 and 30 different computer conferencing systems or networks byvolunteer ‘porters’ who screened or filtered information provided by participantsfor relevancy and coherentness.” (Anderson 1993, 32)

During the six-week symposium, about 240 messages were posted by variousparticipants in: “at least twenty states of the United States, from five different sitesin Canada, from several parts of Australia and the United Kingdom, and fromNew Zealand, Norway, and Venezuela.” (Anderson and Mason 1993, 12).Finally, the authors concluded that: “electronic networking can provide cost-effective, yet meaningful, interactions among distance education professionals.”(Anderson and Mason 1993, 15)

Another example was provided by Davie and Inskip (1992). At a master’s level course onprogram evaluation offered through the Department of Adult Education at The Ontario Insti-tute for Studies in Education, practicing program evaluators visited the class. With someindividual instruction, the three visiting experts were able to use the system (Participate) con-veniently and without difficulty. Further, the experts had the opportunity to read the previouscourse discussion and, hence, adapt their contributions. Davie and Inskip concluded thatthe experts enjoyed the experience and indicated willingness to contribute in later courses.



SkitsLaird (1985, 136) defined a skit as: “a prepared enactment, with precise dialogue pro-vided for the ’actors’, who are usually students reading their roles from scripts.”

In CMC, an instructor could conduct a skit by using more than one user ID. One simpleexample that could be developed into a skit was provided by (Turoff 1982, 77) whostated that he has on occasion posed as an anonymous student to ask himself the questionshe wanted to be asked. He perceived skits as a technique that can be helpful in “breakingthe ice” with a new class.

Many-to-many Techniques: The Conferencing Paradigm

A characteristic of the techniques presented in thissection is that all participants have the opportunityto take part in the interaction. Such interaction isthe most common application of educationalCMC and it can be facilitated in open or closedcomputer conferences. The techniques discussed

are debate, simulation, role-play, case study, discussion groups, transcript based assign-ments, brainstorming, delphi technique, nominal group technique, forum, and projectgroup.

DebatesSeaman and Fellenz (1989, 65) wrote: “A debate is a structured discussion during whichtwo sides of an issue are presented and argued by two or more individuals within a giventime period.” Knox (1987, 88) offered another explanation: “Similar to a lecture or panel,but two or four debaters argue two sides of an important issue to clarify differences andrelated reasoning.”

Clark (1992a and 1992b) organized a CMC debate about war protesters and free-dom of speech in February 1991 as a part of the What’s in the News Telecomputing Projectat Pennsylvania State University. The participants were fifth and sixth graders in two localschools. The debate centered on a proposition that stated United States citizens should notstage protests in times of war. Before the debate, neither team knew which position itwould be assigned, so each had to research the issue and learn as much as it could aboutboth points of view. The affirmative side supported the proposition and the negative onechallenged the affirmative one. The object of the debate was to see which of the teamscould do a better job of presenting the case. Two students from the university debate teamand a doctoral student in history were enlisted to evaluate the debate.

Clark (1992a, 58) offered these guidelines for an electronic debate with regard toparticipation, preparation, coordination, and evaluation:



■ Participation. A debate could engage two classes that agree to participate actively, twoteachers who know how to telecompute, one impartial coordinator who knows how totelecompute, an experienced debater to help students learn the process, and two ormore evaluators familiar with the proposition.

■ Preparation. Give the coordinator a list of curriculum-related issues, become familiar withthe evaluation criteria, and decide whether a winner will be declared. Set up speechdeadlines within a four-week framework, and agree on a maximum word length foreach speech. Organize classes into teams by role or by speech, and have groupsresearch both sides of a proposition

■ Coordination. The coordinator should formulate and announce the proposition, ran-domly assign groups to affirmative or negative, and channel speeches between the twosides. Further, the coordinator should mediate the debate, keep team identities secretuntil after the last speech is sent, and enlist evaluators and manage the evaluationprocess.

■ Evaluation. After the debate, feedback from the evaluators could be discussed andstudents could exchange comments on the issue and process.

Clark (1992a, 58) also recalled the sequence of debate events:

Day 1: Topic receivedDay 4: Sides assigned by coordinatorDay 5: Material from speech I reviewedDay 7: Opposing speech I receivedDay 11: Speech II sentDay 12: Opposing speech II receivedDay 14: Rebuttal sentDay 15: Rebuttal received, teams identifiedDay 17: Participants exchanged e-mail about themselves

Simulations or GamesSimulation can be explained as “imitation of interpersonal or other dynamics, often usingmaterials and roles, to help participants feel as well as understand the dynamics of acomplex situation.” (Knox 1987, 89)

Discussing simulation and CMC, Hiltz and Turoff stated:

The major defect that most games exhibit, especially educational ones, is that thecommunications actually used in the face-to-face game environment usually do notreflect the real world. By putting the game into a computerized communicationsenvironment, we can program the structures for communications that the gameimplies. This may include which players in the game can talk to whom and inwhat circumstances; costs or resources that must be expended for communica-tions; leaks of communication; rumor simulation and unanticipated breakdowns or



busy signals. The computer can act as the game controller, scheduling the eventsto occur and providing the outcomes based on the actions the role-players take.One very significant aspect of this flexible degree of control is the ability to controlthe clock. Because of this, the game can be played in a regulated time manner(such as every week of play representing a year) or in real time. There are manygames where playing in real time rather than accelerated time would be benefi-cial to enhancing the realism, including some of the disaster type games designedto educate people on how to deal with crisis situations. Since people can interactat a time of their own choosing, a computer-based game can go on over days,weeks, or months, just as for a computerized conference. (Hiltz and Turoff 1978,308)

An excellent example of simulation was the Management Practices course taught via theElectronic Information Exchange System (EIES) by Hsu (1989 and 1990) at the New JerseyInstitute of Technology. This course integrated a Business Simulation Game with computerconferencing in a Management Practices course. The students were divided into six groupsof four students. Each group represented a company, and each student was assigned arole as CEO, Financial Officer, Operations Chief, or Marketing Executive. These compa-nies competed against each other in a Business Simulation Game, through three phases ofthe companies’ life cycles (start-up, growth, and independence). The game simulated nineyears during nine weeks of the course. Each year the students “employed” in each com-pany established crucial input data, such as price, advertising, purchase, production, sizeof sales force, and so on. The data was submitted to the instructor, who compiled it andexecuted the game. This process resulted in a set of output data for each company, consist-ing of units sold, back orders, market share, operating income, income tax, net incomeand so on. The companies were evaluated based on the final results after nine years. Eachcompany was assigned a private conference in which the employees could discuss the sim-ulation input and output data. In another conference, called Managers’ Corner, the studentscould participate in management-related discussions.

Another example, described by Rawson (1990), was the International Business Negotia-tion Simulation (IBNS) course. The course was developed jointly by the University of Mary-land, University College and the University of Maryland, College Park. The simulationsconsisted of three half-day workshops, each of which used a computer conferencing-basedsimulation to teach business executives how to negotiate successfully in a specific cross-cultural business environment. The course setting comprised five nodes:

1. the United States company negotiation team at a U.S. site;2. the overseas company negotiation team, located in the overseas country;3. the U.S. company headquarters;4. the overseas company headquarters; and5. the simulation manager.



The program planners acknowledged that stress and timing are often important factors innegotiations and that traditional, asynchronous conferencing can hardly provide a trust-worthy simulation of these important negotiation factors. To ensure that these aspects ofnegotiation were addressed, the IBNS course used virtual synchronous computer conferenc-ing. The information was technically stored and retrieved as in traditional asynchronousconferencing, but the interactivity approached synchronous conferencing because theparticipants were present at scheduled hours and were urged to respond quickly.

The Earth Day Treasure Hunt, described by Levin, Toth, and Douglas (1993), involvedstudents from twenty sites. Each classroom was asked to write up five or six treasure huntclues describing a geographical place. The clues were to describe a particular location onearth such as a city, a mountain peak, a lake, etc. and they could include informationabout latitude, elevation, climate, vegetation, industry, ecology etc. According to Levin,Toth, and Douglas (1993, 558), there were six steps to the Treasure Hunt:

1. Students at each site e-mailed clues describing the location along with the answer tothe organizers.

2. The organizers arranged the clues and added map location clues.3. The clues were sent to the participants a few days before Earth Day.4. The treasure hunt was conducted on Earth Day and the participants e-mailed a progress

report with the locations discovered within one week to the organizers.5. Results from all participants were summarized and returned.6. A Merit Certificate was mailed to all participants.

Levin, Toth, and Douglas (1993, 560) concluded that most participants enjoyed the Trea-sure Hunt and commented on the educational value of such projects.

Role-playsAccording to Rothwell and Kazanas, role-play is “a range of methods in which trainees putthemselves in dramatic situations and act out scenes like actors in a play.... There areessentially two kinds of role-play: structured and spontaneous.... Structured role-play isbased on a case study.... Spontaneous role-plays are based on momentary experiences.”(Rothwell and Kazanas 1989, 415)

A very early example of role-play, carried out in a Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education (FIPSE) course, was reported by Hiltz (1986, 98). During the course,a complex setting was described, and the students were assigned roles to play. Each ofthem was given additional information describing the role he or she was asked to play,and they could use a pen name if they preferred anonymity. Hiltz argued that such role-playing games are usually hard to organize in large classes and that participants may feeltoo shy or too time-restricted to participate effectively in real-time role-plays.

In their 1978 book, The Network Nation: Human Communication via Computer, Hiltzand Turoff (1978, 307) argued that games and role-playing is “one of the most promisingexploratory subjects” for computer conferencing.



They further stated:

Once the group has compiled item lists (such as roles, action options, consequences,and environmental factors) and the relationships among these, we can incorporatethe design of a generalized game controller that will allow the generation of anevent-sequenced scenario-game in (computer conferencing) form. This means that thegroup can play out the “world” model or Gestalt that resulted from their contributionof judgments and views. Such a result also becomes a helpful vehicle for conveyingto others what the group has arrived at and discovering if others agree or disagree.

Further, Hiltz and Turoff (1978, 309) stated:

The role-playing could probably be done more realistically through the computerthan in some of the face-to-face acting games used, especially if the student werenot able to tell which of the other players were students, faculty, or real-life job-holders playing at their convenience from their own terminals.

Goodman (1992) described how the University of Michigan used the Confer CMC systemto involve schools around the world in two different role-plays. In The Arab-Israeli ConflictSimulation, groups of students were assigned roles as countries in the Middle East, theUnited States, and the U.S.S.R. Other groups took on roles as representatives for the WestBank, the PLO, the Moslem and Christian factions in Lebanon, and so on. In The UnitedStates Constitutional Convention Role-play, historical figures who played important roles inshaping the U.S. constitutional history were revived to discuss the Constitution. Groups ofstudents played the roles of Thomas Jefferson, Martin Luther King, Jr., and so on.

Ragsdale and Kassam (1993) described the International Communications and Negotia-tions Simulation (ICONS) project at the Teletech School in Ontario, Canada. The Teletechschool had many newly arrived immigrants among the students and in the simulation, studentsbecame negotiators representing their countries in a series of issues. The issues negotiatedwere arms control, international economic problems, nuclear proliferation, and human rights.The simulations took place in the Confer system at the University of Maryland and they contin-ued for several months. The first weeks were spent in preparation, the actual simulation tookfour weeks, and the last few weeks were spent on the debriefing. Ragsdale and Kassam(1993, 681) argued that the students were given specific tasks and that they were evaluatedin well-defined ways. They further stated that the simulation was a success as far as thestudents did negotiate and they did produce solutions that were included in student papers.

In the fall of 1988, Johannesen taught an Information Systems course via the EKKOconferencing system (Paulsen 1992f, 28). In a conference, she introduced an assignmentthat described a company planning to invest in a new office automation system. Thestudents were assigned roles as user, accounting officer, project manager, labor unionrepresentative, and so forth. Over a period of about fourteen days, the students were toelucidate the different facets of this project reflected through the different roles.



Manuel (1991, 22) reported on a role-play initiated to discuss the extension of Hertburyairport in the United Kingdom: “Nine teams had been assigned terminals at the variousschools which have access to Education 2000’s electronic conferencing system, known asEbenezer. Each team was assigned a character such as Sidney Primrose, managing direc-tor of Herts Road Haulage, Sir Peter and a handful of environmental busybodies.” Further,Manuel (1991) pointed out that CMC role-playing is easily monitored and stored for lateranalysis and that it is useful for long simulations.

The Tall Pines Fantasy Role-play was another documented example. Here, each studentassumed the role of one of the authors presented in the class readings and defends theauthor’s positions. Comparing CMC role-plays with face-to-face role-plays, Davie andInskip (1992) argued that the extended time in CMC courses allowed the role-plays to bemore comprehensive. In addition, the simulated discussion between the “authors” helpedthe students to understand the theoretical positions represented.

The Planet Project was an application of e-mail centered round the imaginary planet Xwhere school children played roles as space voyagers who settle on planet X. There theyinvent topography, mythology, etc. and share experiences, problems and decisions with“voyagers” from other schools via e-mail. Clifford and Warren (1993, 151) argued thatthe children stretched their use of language and form because they had to use their lan-guage to create the reality of planet X.

Case StudiesA case study can be explained as a “discussion of a prepared case situation, which helpsparticipants understand and practice problem-solving and decision-making procedures” (Knox1987, 89). An alternative explanation was offered by Seaman and Fellenz (1989, 111):“Generally [case study] refers to a description of a real and relevant situation that is complexenough to warrant analysis”. Marsick (1990, 226) stated that cases typically include threeinterrelated components: a case study or report, case analysis, and case discussion.

Rasmussen (1993) described some experiences from Nordreisa upper secondary schoolin Norway using The My World is Your World Case Study in teaching English as a secondlanguage. The case was based on the UN report Our Common Future by the BrundtlandCommission and sponsored by The Netherlands’ UNESCO Committee. Schools from coun-tries such as the USA, Australia, England, Indonesia, The Netherlands, Russia, New Zealand,and Norway participated. The schools received a videotape and the Brundtland report alongwith a case description and a schedule. The case introduced these three rounds of topics:

■ What do we see as key-problems in our environment?■ Do we all have similar problems? Does my lifestyle affect your environment?■ What has to be changed?

For each round, the topic was analyzed in the local classrooms. Then the analysis wasdistributed via e-mail to the participating schools for discussion. According to Rasmussen(1993, 693), there was no doubt that international e-mail is a rewarding activity for most



students if it is well organized. He also stated that the work emphasized student independ-ence and an investigative attitude. He further described the role of the teacher as that of anadviser, helper, and administrator.

DiscussionsKnox, (1987, 88) explained discussion this way: “Participants exchange ideas face-to-faceon a topic of shared interest in a group typically between six and twenty for about an hour,depending on topic and group size.” Discussion groups may be implemented as buzzgroups, subgroup discussions, expanding groups, and colloquies.

Buzz groups are “small clusters of learners who are temporarily grouped together for ashort period to address a topic presented by a facilitator.” (Seaman and Fellenz 1989, 131)

In subgroup discussion, the “audience divides into small subgroups for discussion of ideaspresented, questions for speakers, implications.” (Knox 1987, 88)

The expanding group strategy “allows the size of the group to change during an activity.Groups start with a small number and are increased in size with each round of activity.”(Seaman and Fellenz 1989, 130)

In a discussion of colloquy, Seaman and Fellenz (1989, 139) stated: “A simple defini-tion of the word colloquy is “to talk with.” As a structure for a learning situation it retains thisbasic notion of talking together but establishes a format that makes such conversing feasibleamong members of a large audience.”

These discussion group techniques can be employed by establishing separate confer-ences or e-mail distribution lists for each of the groups. In some systems, the participantscan establish these groups themselves, in other systems this has to be done by a systemoperator. The grouping often necessitates thorough planning and explanation.

In a comparative study of communication process and outcome in face-to-face groupsversus computer conferencing groups, Hiltz, Johnson, and Turoff reported that:

There were two to three times as many communication units in the face-to-facegroups consisting of five members each as in the computerized conferencingmode of communication during the same elapsed time. Group decisions wereequally good in the two modes, but the groups were less likely to reach agree-ment in the computerized conferencing mode. There were proportionately more ofthe types of task-oriented communication associated with decision quality in thecomputerized conferences. (Hiltz, Johnson, and Turoff 1987, 225)

Cooper and Selfe (1990) reported their experiences with computer conferencing duringtwo years of graduate and undergraduate courses at the Michigan Technological Univer-sity. There the students were asked to discuss course readings and issues. Cooper andSelfe stated:

At their best, these computer conference discussions are what we often hope in-class discussions will be: discussions in which everyone investigates problems and



ideas of common concern. The discussions are focused on the topics of the courseand explicitly bring in ideas presented in the readings. But because entries incomputer conferences are written, students do not have to compete for the floorand can say as much as they want to without being interrupted, although they stillmust be responsive to the interests of their classmates if they don’t want to beignored. (Cooper and Selfe 1990, 848)

Reporting from two online graduate courses at the Ontario Institute of Studies in Education,Harasim (1987, 133) concluded that collaborative group learning based upon groupdiscussion and interaction among learners was effective online.

Facilitating an online discussion is in many ways similar to facilitating a discussion usingface-to-face techniques. According to Carlson, the facilitator needs to:

help people get started, give them feedback, summarize, weave the contributionsof different folks together, get it un-stuck when necessary, deal with individuals whoare disruptive or get off the track, bring in new material to freshen it up periodically,and get feedback from the group on how things are going and what might happennext.... (Further, the facilitator needs to) communicate with the group as a whole,sub-groups, and individuals to encourage participation. (Carlson 1989, 6.11)

Based on his experiences as designer and facilitator of online courses at The OntarioInstitute for Studies in Education (OISE), Davie (1989, 83) reported that he introduced twogroup assignments in a course rather than only one. First, Davie presented a short assign-ment for groups of two students. Then, he combined pairs of learning partners into groupsof four or six. Davie further contended (Davie 1989, 84) that students liked the experienceof writing together and that they found two strategies helpful. The first was to log on to thesystem at the same time to speed up the communication process, and the second was topass drafts of papers back and forth.

Phillips, Santoro, and Kuehn (1988) described the use of CMC in a small group per-formance course. They argued that instruction in such courses is often ineffective because ofthe instructors’ inability to effectively monitor group discussion. Using a computer networkhas three benefits:

1. instructors can closely monitor progress in the groups;2. students receive detailed feedback about their performance of communication skills in

their groups; and3. the instructional staff can increase their monitoring efficiency to effectively advise more

groups than in non-computerized group performance courses.

Albrektson (1995, 105) concluded, from a Listserv-based test that merged a residentschool course in church history with a distance learning module, that the technique has“enormous flexibility and educational integrity in its online form. While more research needs



to be done, it seems likely that [the technique has] the capability to provide an educationalexperience equivalent to methodology and outcome to those conducted live in an on-campus setting.”

Another example of discussion groups was described by Johnson-Lenz and Johnson-Lenz(1990) in an article about The Living on Purpose Course, offered as a collaboration betweenChinnok Learning Center and Living on Purpose. Before the course, the participants signeda covenant to keep each other’s items confidential. Online, as a part of the course, partici-pants answered questions such as “What is important in your life?” and “What do youthink of yourself?” Participants must scrutinize their lifestyles to formulate answers to share -in writing - with the group. Many people found it less frightening to share their inner feel-ings and thoughts via computer conferencing than to do so face-to-face. In this way, tech-nology may facilitate valuable human interaction between people who feel comfortablewith the medium. In the course, “a talking stick” that represented permission to speak waspassed around a circle. Each person spoke his or her truth in turn while everyone else lis-tened with respect. This virtual circle concept encouraged everyone to express opinionsand avoid reticence.

Based on his experiences from a graduate program offered through computer conferenc-ing at Boise State University, Eisley (1991, 38) described the following thirteen discussionformats for CMC that could help to keep discussions focused, productive, and interesting:

1. The critique. The students could be asked to point out the strengths and weaknesses of aproposal and then suggest improvements. It is possible to ask the students to restrict theircontribution to one or two comments so that the critique is not exhausted before all stu-dents have commented.

2. The group report. A group of students could work in a restricted conference. A summa-rized report from the work could be presented in a public conference and followed byquestions from the other students.

3. Twenty questions. The moderator could act as a client and ask the students to narrowdown the client’s needs through an interview.

4. The poll. The moderator could pose a question and ask the students to register theirvotes on the issue by posting an e-mail message to the moderator.

5. Timed disclosure. The students could be asked to review an article or comment on anissue and post it to the teacher via e-mail before a deadline. At a certain point in time,the teacher could share all the comments with the class. In this way, students couldmake their first contributions without too much influence from dominant peers.

6. The assigned debate. Students could be assigned to affirmative and negative positionsand asked to debate an issue.

7. Free association. The students could be asked to express their thoughts and ideas on asubject without too much structure of the discussion format.

8. The hot seat. One student could be asked to “sit in the hot seat” and the other studentscould be asked to pose questions to him or her on a specific topic.



9. The Socratic dialogue. First, the teacher could ask a question, then one student couldanswer it, and then the teacher could ask a new question. In this way, every othercomment would be from the teacher.

10.The shotgun. The teacher could post a number of related questions at the same time.Then, each student would be asked to answer whichever ones appeal to him or her.

11.Go around the circle. Each student could be asked to respond to the same question, andwhen all students have contributed, the topic could be closed.

12.Guided discovery. The class could be asked to pose questions about a research reportso that the teacher could reveal the results when the students hit on questions that wereaddressed in the research.

13.Blind man’s bluff. The moderator could pose a purposely misleading statement and letthe students discover the false premise through discussion.

Transcript-based AssignmentsDavie (1987, 14) stated that “one of the main advantages of a computer conference isthat the medium provides a complete transcript of the course interactions”. Building on thisobservation, Davie and Wells (1991, 21) suggested the following three types of transcript-based assignments to promote student reflection:

[First,] students might be required to retrieve all the comments they authored duringthe course. The assignment could then ask the students to reflect on their contributionsand provide a statement of the overall framework or perspective embodied in them.

A second possibility is to ask students to pull together all the comments related toa particular topic and to write an essay discussing which comments they agree withand why, or to critique the comments from the perspective of a particular theory.

A third possibility is concerned with improving the student’s analytic and writ-ing skills. Too often, students write to please the teacher. This contribution isgraded and then ignored by both parties. Instead of this dead end process,students can be asked to retrieve an earlier note or assignment and rewrite thework either to make it more effective, or to reflect the current state of learning. Thiskind of recursive learning can help the student to build skills in a way that is simplynot feasible in the face-to-face classroom. (Davie and Wells 1991, 21)

These techniques resemble the traditional observation team techniques described bySeaman and Fellenz (1989) as listening teams, audience reaction teams, and fishbowls.

Listening teams are “small groups of learners who are assigned to listen for specific infor-mation during a presentation. The assignment of topics prior to the presentation providesthe listener with a structure for organizing the information presented. The division of laboramong several individuals or groups allows the listeners to specialize in one aspect of thepresentation with the assurance that others are critically analyzing other aspects of thepresentation. Through discussion after, all points of the presentation are shared.” (Seamanand Fellenz 1989, 137)



The audience reaction team technique is similar to the listening team approach. However,“members of an audience reaction team need not restrict their remarks to the end of a pres-entation. They may interrupt the presenter at any point to seek clarification or to direct thetrend of the presentation to the needs or interests of the audience.” (Seaman and Fellenz1989, 138)

The fishbowl technique was explained this way by Seaman and Fellenz (1989, 130):

“The fishbowl strategy involves group members in observations of one another. Itderives its name from the analogy of people observing the activities of fish withinthe controlled environment of an aquarium or bowl. While some group membersdiscuss a topic or perform a behavior related to the assigned task, other membersobserve them.... After the active group members have completed their activity, theobservers will provide feedback to the group.”

Discussing the DT200 course at the Open University, Mason (1993) reported that thestudents had to write a summary of the course conference. The summary was to focus onthe most important aspects of the discussion and on significant aspects that were notincluded in the discussion. Mason concluded that the assignment turned out to play a verysignificant part in the educational value of the course. She pointed out, however, thatwriting a summary of about 100 conference messages is harder than summarizing a bookor a lecture because of the relatively “chaotic” structure of a conference.

Brainstorming sessionsOne definition of brainstorming is “an interaction strategy used to generate ideas or to helpdetermine the exact nature of content to be discussed. This approach encourages groupmembers to think creatively and to expand upon ideas of fellow group members. Theprimary purpose of brainstorming is to create a pool of ideas on a topic.” (Seaman andFellenz 1989, 134)

Hiltz and Turoff (1978, 300) stated that in brainstorming, criticism is ruled out, free-wheeling association is welcomed, quantity is wanted, and combination and improvementare sought. Further, they suggested that a computer conferencing system “designed tooptimize brainstorming would probably limit text items to a small size, might censor itemscontaining negative words and phrases, and utilize stored profiles on individuals to suggestgroup members. It might also use automated indexing techniques to group and organizeitems.”

One possible adaptation of brainstorming to CMC could be brainwriting which is:

“a modification of brainstorming - based on written communication - that could beadapted to CMC. Two variations are common...: (1) the brainwriting pool, and(2) battelle-bildmappen-brain-writing (BBB). In the first approach, a problem isread to a small group (six is a good number). After group members brainstorm onthe problem aloud, they are given several photographs or drawings unrelated to



it. Then they write down ideas suggested to them by the pictures. Solutions areread to the group and used to stimulate more ideas. In the second approach, aproblem is read to a group. Individuals scribble ideas on a piece of paper. Afterseveral ideas are listed on the paper, it is placed in a pool at the center of thegroup. Individuals remove different sheets, record new ideas on them, and placethem back in the pool.” (Rothwell and Kazanas 1989, 437)

Hiltz and Turoff (1978, 301) offered that brainwriting is essentially written brainstorming:“Each person writes an idea down and passes it to a neighbor, who must add to it. Thesepieces of paper are passed around until everyone has commented on every piece ofpaper. With slight changes, in most (computer conferencing) systems this would meanpassing a comment to each participant in turn, to make a required addition beforeincorporating it into the conference.”

In a description of the IBM internal CMC network, Rueda (1992, 97) presented abrainstorming-related activity that took place over four days in September 1991 on the C-lang forum. The activity was initiated by a request for an elegant method of branchingover the value of a character string in the C programming language. In the followinginteraction, nineteen participants from thirteen locations contributed thirty-five entries andnine distinct solutions.

Delphi TechniquesReferencing Dolkey and Helmer (1963, 458), Rothwell and Kazanas (1989, 438) statedthat the Delphi procedure is a technique for “obtaining the most reliable consensus ofopinion of a group of experts ... by a series of intensive questionnaires interspersed withcontrolled opinion feedback. It is used to scan the environment to identify possiblechanges, their effects, training needs, new work methods and approaches, and issuesworth exploring.” (Rothwell and Kazanas 1989, 438).

Hiltz and Turoff (1978) distinguished between forecasting delphies, in which a group ofpeople come up with a joint forecast, and policy delphies, in which the objective is todevelop the strongest arguments for or against particular resolutions. They further expectedthe following advantages to emerge from computerized delphi:

Besides the reduction of elapsed time to carry out a Delphi via the computer, theother significant impact is the ability for the process to flow steadily and incremen-tally. In other words, forecasting of one variable or one policy resolution can beexamined first in computerized conferencing and carried through the wholeprocess. Alternatively, different items could be in different phases of the processaccording to the wishes for the group. This provides a greater ability for the groupto focus its effort and should result in raising the quality of the result. (Hiltz andTuroff 1978, 293)



Some CMC systems include balloting functions that can support the delphi technique.According to Hiltz and Turoff (1985, 687), EIES provides several voting scales that can beattached to comments. Feasibility and desirability scales can, for example, be attached toa project proposal. The system would then automatically count the votes and display theresults. In this way, a delphi group has a tool to make a quick determination of the issueson which they need to focus discussion.

Waggoner (1992) described a computer conferencing delphi that was conducted by aconsortium of eight intermediate school districts in Michigan. The consortium examined thequestion: “What will be the impacts of high technology on the content, delivery, andorganization and administration of instruction (K-Adult) conducted by local and intermediateschool districts over the next five years?” (Waggoner 1992, 160)

The study contained three components: “a statewide teleconference, a national delphistudy, and a future scenarios workshop.... The delphi study was intended to develop forecast-ing and planning data about a range of questions by explicating the opinion of a nationallydistributed panel of experts on technology and education.” (Waggoner 1992, 160)

An elaborate, thirteen-step delphi process was developed and implemented, employingeighteen paid experts and the Confer computer conferencing system. Each expert wasinitially asked to identify and elaborate on the significance of the three most important tech-nological trends or products that will influence education. The responses were compiledinto thirty-five issues, and the experts then voted and commented on each of the issues. Fora further clarification of some of the issues, nine of the issues were entered into a secondround of votes and comments. Finally, the delphi process was synthesized in a set of four-teen findings. Summing up, Waggoner concluded:

“The group found the potential to be greater than was achieved in this particularcase. This was so despite the fact that the group was quite satisfied with the otherparticipants, that the process was clearly communicated, and that they were rela-tively comfortable with the medium (use of computers and terminals).” (Waggoner1992, 180)

Nominal Group TechniquesSeaman and Fellenz (1989, 136) stated that the term nominal group technique “comesfrom its use of participants as individuals - only nominally (in name only) as a group - for theinitial stage of idea generation. This approach calls first for the silent generation and prior-ity ranking of ideas by each group member. This is followed by a public listing of ideasusually by asking for each person’s top-ranked idea and then moving on to second- andthird-ranked ideas until everyone’s list is exhausted.... Once this is completed, groupmembers are allowed to discuss the ideas.... After the discussion, a vote is taken in whichgroup members are asked to rank the ideas that have been generated.”

A more thorough discussion of the nominal group technique was presented by Korhonen(1990, 247-259). Hiltz and Turoff (1978, 294) noted that the first stage of the technique



could be handled by computer conferencing “without the uneasiness that sometimes accom-panies sitting around a table and looking at one another without talking.” They further (Hiltzand Turoff 1978, 289) imply that computer conferencing is well suited to handle anonymityand that “the introduction of anonymity is ... one of the strongest techniques to preventconformity to group pressures.”

The University of Auckland has developed a groupware system to support synchronousgroup sessions, and Sheffield and McQueen (1990) reported on the experiences from amanagement course exercise using the groupware. Two groups of ten students took part inan assignment using the Nominal Group Technique. One of the groups utilized the group-ware, the other group used traditional tools such as wall-mounted sheets of paper and feltmarkers. Both groups expressed satisfaction with: “the technical and the socio-emotionalaspect of the discussion” (p. 181). The students using the groupware completed the assign-ment in less time than the other students, and as the result of the groupware process, theydeveloped a written assignment report.

ForumsA forum can be explained as a technique where “participants question and discuss thepresentation as a total group.” (Knox 1987, 88). Alternatively, a forum can be defined as“an open discussion carried on by one or more resource persons and an entire group. It isused when large groups of twenty-five persons or more meet for the purpose of diffusion ofknowledge, information, or opinion. The forum tends to be semiformal in nature and isdirected by a moderator. The moderator is responsible for guiding discussion during whichthe audience is encouraged to raise and discuss issues, make comments, offer information,or ask questions of the resource person(s) and each other.” (Sisco 1990, 285)

Forum is a common use of computer conferencing systems in education. Several systems,among them Compuserve, actually use the term Forum as the name of their conferences.

Describing the experiences from a course about distance education and CMC at theUniversity of Oslo in the spring of 1991, Jenssen (1992, 13) reported on a traditional useof an informal CMC forum. First, the moderators and the participants were asked to intro-duce themselves. Later, the system was mainly utilized as a forum where participants couldpost questions and receive answers. In addition, the moderators used the forum as achannel for distribution of information. The moderators had not planned any structureddiscussions and just a few longer threads of spontaneous discussion emerged.

ProjectsIn Andersen et al (1987, 15), a project was defined as a human endeavor which createschange, has composite goals and objectives, is unique, is limited in time and scope, andinvolves a variety of resources, with different skills, responsibilities, and competence.

Sligte and Meijer (1993, 798) reported that the European Schools Project (ESP) hasexpanded to over 200 secondary schools and educational institutions in 20 countriesinvolving hundreds of projects. Many of the ESP projects, called teletrips, had primarily alanguage-focus.



Riel (1990) described her experiences from the AT& T Learning Network regarding aform of projects she termed “electronic learning circles”. She defined a learning circle as asmall number of classrooms that interact electronically to accomplish a shared goal inwhich each classroom acts as a team that contributes to the overall end product (Riel1990, 450). The following five steps of interaction were suggested:

1. Teachers and students select a project topic and start communicating electronically withthe classrooms with which they are grouped.

2. Each classroom plans a learning task and forwards the plans for discussion within thelearning circle.

3. The students work closely with peers in their local classroom as well as with students indistant locations to carry out the learning activities.

4. Each classroom collects, analyzes, and arranges materials for a project report. Thereports from each of the projects are compiled into a collective publication of projectreports.

5. The collective report is distributed to all participants.

Riel (1990, 452) further claimed to have provided educational support to hundreds ofteachers in learning circles. She also stated that the circles helped teachers and studentsacquire knowledge, develop teaching/learning strategies, increase self-esteem, anddevelop meaningful relationships.

In a later article relating her experiences from the AT& T Learning Network, Rieldescribed global education through learning circles and stated that the aim of globaleducation is “to help students see the complexity of the world through the eyes and mindsof people whose viewpoint is very different than their own” (Riel 1993, 221). She furtherstated (Riel 1993, 223) that learning circles provide “an effective way to integrate com-munication technology, classroom curriculum, and the aims of global education.”

In the global education learning circles, six to nine classes formed a learning circle.Teachers and students sharing academic interests but representing different geographic orcultural perspectives constituted a circle. Each class, together with its teacher, chose andtaught one of the projects in the learning circle. Donath (1993) described the AT& T Learn-ing Network experiences of a 9th grade German class that chose a project on xenopho-bia. The advantages of this and other projects were summarized in this way: “English as aforeign language is used in a realistic communicative situation with mainly native speakerswhile the topics are interesting enough to be researched locally and discussed internation-ally. The motivation is not only based on the communicative situation but on theautonomous learning principle as well.” (Donath 1993, 209).

In addition to the previous German project, Riel (1993, 229) mentioned these projectexamples:

■ Students in British Columbia, Canada asked the other classes to contribute on environ-mental issues for a collective newspaper.



■ California classes discussed the whaling industry with Eskimo children.■ An elementary class in Canada integrated weather and pollution data from the United

States and Australia in a project on weather patterns and the greenhouse effect.■ Students in Belgium chose a project on waste management.

Riel (1993, 223) stated that: “Studies of network projects have found an extremely low suc-cess rate (1-2 percent) among projects that are introduced by individuals on open structure,free-access networks”. Learning circles, however, “provide teachers with the necessarydirection and support to explore creative ways of integrating communication technologywith school curriculum and community programs. The project approach to exploring andsolving real problems that characterizes learning circle activities encourages the integrationof different subjects helping to place knowledge and skill in the context of their use in theadult community.” (Riel 1993, 234)

Finally, Riel (1993, 235) claimed that teachers involved in learning circles regarded “theirown professional development as more significant than the enhancement of student learning.”

Another example is the NKI Electronic College Project Assignment Course, taught viathe EKKO system by this author, in the 1991 spring semester (Paulsen 1992a, 8). Thecourse work involved collecting information, both by doing interviews and a literaturesearch. An important goal was to make the students accustomed to project managementand cooperation. A second main objective was to teach students to produce a writtenreport of the project results. The students were encouraged to find a project related both toknowledge obtained through the NKI Program and to their job. They were asked to formproject groups of one to three students.

Each student received two Norwegian textbooks through regular mail. “Goal DirectedProject Management”, also available in English (Andersen, Grude, Haug, and Turner,1987), is a general-purpose textbook for project management. It emphasizes that projectdevelopment comprises people, systems, and organizations. The other book was written asa guide to project work for on-campus students at the NKI College of Computer Science. Inaddition to the textbooks, the students received a fifteen-page study guide that was devel-oped for both correspondence students and EKKO students. It comprised extra guidancefor distance students, course requirements, and assignments. Because the study guide wascompleted a few days after the course started, it was distributed via EKKO.

Twelve students, ten men and two women, enrolled on the course. For most of them, thiswas the 10th and final course in the program, so they were all advanced computerconferencing users, with no need for user support. Most of the students enrolled on morethan one course during this semester. The course started the first week of February 1991,and the final project report was due May 10th. During this period the students had tocomplete four assignments. The assignments were not paced, that is, they had no duedate. The first assignment covered the theory from the textbooks. Each student had to turn ina short essay via e-mail. In addition, the students were asked to present project ideas in theclass conference. In the second assignment the students had to form a project group andpresent their project task, milestone plan, and responsibility chart. The third assignment



asked each group to write a progress report, and the fourth assignment asked for the finalproject report.

The teacher’s job was to comment on the assignments and help the students wheneverthey had questions about their projects and the project management tools. Most of thisfeedback was routed via e-mail to each specific group, but information of general interestwas posted on the class’s bulletin board, or in the class’s conference.

Describing the experiences from online project work at the NKS College in Norwayduring the spring of 1989, Fjuk (Fjuk and Jenssen 1992, 7 and Fjuk 1992, 34) reportedthat students experienced peer dependence and reduced flexibility. Due to these twofactors, NKS decided not to include obligatory online project work the following semester.

Drayton (1993, 215) described the Eratosthenes Project in which students and teacherson LabNet estimated the circumference of the earth by simultaneously measuring the angleof sunrays at two locations in different latitudes. LabNet was used to coordinate the datacollection and to share the findings. According to Drayton (1993, 217) the project demon-strated how the network could facilitate learning through project design, coordination, datacollection, and sharing of results.

Prims (1993, 668) presented collective construction of materials and structured gather-ing of data as two basic models that have been used in Catalonia, Spain. Examples ofcollective construction of materials mentioned were: Magazine Production, Gathering ofTales and Legends, and the collective written tale of Penelopy. Penelopy was a fictional10-year-old girl who traveled from one village to another in a journey covering 26 schools.When she visited a school, the students introduced their school and village to her. Inaddition, the students had to write a description of her way from the previous school.Among the projects involving structured gathering of data were: Meteorological DataCollection and The Millenium Game. In the first project, each school collected a set ofmeteorological data which was compiled into a common database. In The MilleniumGame, schools compiled records for a Catalan history database.

Sternheim and Sternheim (1993, 849) presented a list of telecommunication projectsand activities with the intent to illustrate how teachers had used SpaceMet, a PC-based bul-letin board system for teachers and students. Among the project listed were The Acid RainProject in which classes shared and compared data from middle and senior high schools,The Weather Data Project that linked schools in the United States, Canada, and Australiavia K12Net, and The Mung Bean Experiment that studied the germination and growth ofmung beans exposed to gamma rays. Sternheim and Sternheim (1993, 845) argued thatprojects require: “a good facilitator or moderator, a ‘critical mass’ of participants, realistictime lines, and a simple concept.

Kristensen (1993, 526) mentioned that a computer network of seven primary schools inwestern Norway was used to exchange meteorological data via a mailing list. A databaseprogram was available for the students to compile and organize the data collected. Alsousing a database for registration, Gjerløw (1993, 304) mentioned an acid rain project(Milda) conducted by secondary schools in Norway. In this project, students registered anddiscussed precipitation pH values. Among other projects, Anttila and Eriksen (1993)



referred to the Acid Rain and Aquadata projects. They concluded that “Many telematicsprojects have proved to have a positive effect on the quality of the work and the motivationfor students as well as for the teachers. It improves the communicative foreign language useand increases intercultural consciousness.” (Anttila and Eriksen 1993, 103)

Stefansdottir (1993, 833) mentioned two projects conducted at the Ismennt network inIceland. In the Geographical Project, students from five locations exchanged informationabout their local areas. One part of the project was for each group to plan a two-day tourof their location for a visit. The resulting itineraries included both visits to shopping mallsand moose hunting and the teachers maintained that the project made the geographicallocations more interesting for the students. In The Counting Bird Species project, thestudents were asked to count as many species of birds as possible and a standard note-book was distributed to the observers via a conference. Some of the participating classesfocused on birds, some on computer communication, and others on outdoor activities.

Techniques not Found to be Utilized in CMCSeveral of the techniques frequently discussed in the adult education literature reviewed werenot applied in this review of teaching techniques. Since this review has showed that so manytraditional adult education techniques have been adapted to CMC, the following discussionsuggests how some more techniques could be used in CMC. The techniques discussed arein-basket exercises, panels, committee hearings, cognitive networks, and jigsaws.

In-basket ExercisesThe in-basket exercise “derives its name from the manager’s in-basket or mailbox. It is asimulation strategy in which items that might appear in a manager’s box are presented toparticipants, who must then make a decision on the proper strategy for responding to eachitem” (Seaman and Fellenz 1989, 83).

The in-basket exercise could be an excellent technique for CMC. E-mail can take awaysome of the restraints of a face-to-face exercise and keep up a time pressure which cannotbe accommodated by correspondence courses. Automatic recording of time may be auseful feature in negotiations where time is critical. However, correspondence includingbrochures, stationery, graphics, etc. cannot easily be sent to an e-mail in-basket.

PanelsKnox (1987, 87) gave this brief explanation of a panel: “Two or more speakers make pre-sentations on different aspects of an issue, otherwise similar to a lecture.” A more extensiveexplanation was presented by Sisco (1990, 285): “A panel is defined as a small group ofthree to six persons, who sit around a table in the presence of an audience and have apurposeful conversation on a topic in which they have specialized knowledge. The panel istypically informal in nature, usually lasts under an hour, is guided by a moderator who startsthe session and sustains discussion, and has no audience participation other than watching



and listening. Because of the latter characteristic, the panel is usually followed by a forumwhich does allow verbal participation by the audience.”

A panel could be organized in a bulletin board system where each expert in a grouppresents a paper, an idea, or a statement on a well-defined topic. The panel then continuesto discuss the topic led by a moderator. Audience participation could be limited by givingthe audience only read access, not write access, to the bulletin board.

Committee HearingsSeaman and Fellenz (1989, 144) stated that: “By definition, the committee hearing is thequestioning of a person or several persons by a group. It is basically an interview to whichthe dynamics of group interaction have been added. It can be structured to deal withseveral individuals by questioning more than one at the same time or by interviewing themin sequence.”

External examiners, faculty, and even co-students could participate in a two or three dayonline examination period. The candidates could prepare hard copy or upload the exami-nation paper to their challengers some time before the online examination starts. During theexamination period, the challengers are expected to post questions about the examinationpaper which the candidates must then answer in a plenary conference. The advantage of thiscompared with a traditional oral examination is that both questioners and answerers havemore time to contemplate, than in a hectic one hour face-to-face examination. The onlineexamination is, of course, much more interactive than a traditional written examination.

Cognitive NetworksIn cognitive networks (cognet) “all participants do some reading and answer the samequestions before they gather - but only several people read the same material. When theygather these “homogeneous” groups meet to prepare group answers which they share inreports to the other teams.” (Laird 1985, 144)

A cognitive network could be applied in a setting where several students read variousonline publications, write papers or presentations on a given topic, and post them to theclass’ conference system. In this way, the presentation would introduce different perspec-tives to the conference and hence be more varied and interesting for all students.

JigsawsDescribing jigsaws, Laird (1985, 151) stated that “... participants may be given parts of adesign or of an organization; they assemble these into a ‘System’ or an ‘OrganizationChart.’ They may be given the elements of a letter or a report; they put it together into alogical outline. They may be given the key variables of a decision-making problem; theirtask is to select from the pieces of the jigsaw the proper action to take for every conceiv-able combination of variables.”

A group of students could be asked to develop a joint paper on a political issue. Onestudent could then be assigned to each of the political parties and asked to study andpresent the views of the party in the paper.



Summary of Online Teaching TechniquesThe techniques presented here are by no means meant to constitute an exhaustive list ofonline teaching techniques. However, they represent a comprehensive array of examplesthat show the gamut of techniques that are available for teachers, program planners, anddesigners of CMC courses. Based on the examples found in the literature review, some tech-niques seem prevalent and others seem rare. It should also be noted that some of the tech-niques found in the review of adult education literature were not found to be utilized inCMC. The review showed, though, that practitioners have a wide range of techniques tochoose from, and that many-to-many techniques seem to be more common than other tech-niques.

One may criticize the approach used in this literature review for relying too much ontechniques developed for face-to-face teaching. The approach could be regarded as view-ing new paradigms through a rear-view mirror and as marching backwards into the future.However, comprehension of accumulated knowledge is a necessary step in the evolution ofonline education.

ReferencesAlbrektson, J. R. 1995. Mentored Online Seminar: A Model for Graduate-Level DistanceLearning. T.H.E. Journal. 1995(October):102-105.

Andersen, E. S., K. V. Grude, T. Haug, and J. R. Turner, 1987. Goal Directed ProjectManagement. London: Kogan Page.

Anderson, T. 1993. The Bangkok Project. Open Praxis 1(1):32.

Anderson, T. and R. Mason, 1993. International Computer Conferencing for ProfessionalDevelopment: The Bangkok Project. The American Journal of Distance Education,7(2):5-18.

Anttila, K. M. and M. Eriksen, 1993. Schools in Network: A telematics project at INFA,the Royal Danish School of Educational Studies, Copenhagen, Denmark. In Teleteaching,eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 99-103. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third TeleteachingConference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Bazillion, R. J. and Connie Braun, 1992. Technology and library users automation and out-reach: Library services to off-campus students. Journal of Distance Education, 7(2):67-75.

Boyle, P. G. 1981. Planning Better Programs, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Boston, R. L. 1992. Remote Delivery of Instruction via the PC and Modem: What have welearned? The American Journal of Distance Education, 6(3):45-57.

Bråtane, K. 1993. Teachers in network. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways,123-132. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93,Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993

Bull, G., J. Harris, and D. Drucker, 1992. Building an electronic culture: The AcademicVillage at Virginia. In Empowering Networks: Computer Conferencing in Education, ed. M.D. Waggoner, 35-53. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.



Carlson, L. 1989. Effective moderation of computer conferences: Hints for moderators. InModerating Conferences, ed. M. G. Brochet, 6.10-6.13. Guelph, Ontario: University ofGuelph.

Clark, G. C. 1992a. Debate, electronic style. Instructor (February):57-58.

Clark, G. C. 1992b. Project idea: Electronic debate. Telecommunications in EducationNews, 3(3):14-15.

Clifford, T. and C. Warren. 1993. The planet project. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies andB. Samways, 147-155. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference,TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Cooper, M. M. and C. L. Selfe. 1990. Computer conferences and learning: Authority,Resistance, and internally persuasive discourse. College English 52(8):847-869.

Dagiene, V. and G. Grigas. 1993. Development of problem solving skills and creativitythrough distance teaching of programming. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B.Samways, 179-182. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference,TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Daloz, L. A. P. 1990. Mentorship. In Adult Learning Methods, ed. M. W. Galbraith,205-224. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

Davie, L. 1987. Facilitation of adult learning through computer conferencing. In Proceed-ing of the Second Guelph Symposium on Computer Conferencing, 11-22. Guelph,Ontario: University of Guelph.

Davie, L. 1989. Facilitation techniques for the on-line tutor. In Mindweave: Communica-tions, Computers, and Distance Education, eds. R. Mason and A. Kaye, 74-85. Oxford:Pergamon Press. (http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap6.html)

Davie, L. E. and R. Wells. 1991. Empowering the learner through computer-mediatedcommunication. The American Journal of Distance Education, 5(1):15-23.

Davie, L. E. and R. Inskip. 1992. Fantasy and structure in computer mediated courses.Journal of Distance Education, 7(2):31-50.

Dixon, R. S. 1991. Value-added network services... and beyond. A paper presented atthe Applications of Computer Conferencing to Teacher Education and Human ResourceDevelopment Conference, June 13-15, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.

Donath, R. 1993. Intercultural learning with the AT& T Learning Network: An electronic-mailjourney of a German Class. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 201-209.Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim,Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Drayton, B. 1993. The role of telecommunications in fostering a community of innovators.In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 211-221. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Eisley, M. 1991. Guidelines for conducting instructional discussions on a computer confer-ence. In Applications of Computer Conferencing to Teacher Education and HumanResource Development, ed. A. J. Miller, 35-39. Proceedings from an InternationalSymposium on Computer Conferencing at the Ohio State University, June 13-15.




Etzkowitz, H. 1989. The electronic focused interview: E-mail as a dialogic interviewingmedium. In Message Handling Systems and Distributed Applications, eds. E. Stefferud,O. J. Jacobsen, and P. Schicker, 525-537. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Electronic University Network. 1991. The EUN Handbook. San Francisco: EUN.

Fjuk, A. 1992. NKS Elektroniske Høgskole fra våren -89 til og med våren -92: EnErfaringsrapport om Dataformidlet kommunikasjon ved NKS Høgskole. Oslo: NKS.

Fjuk, A. and A. E. Jenssen 1992. Designing on-line courses and studies. A paper pre-sented at the conference Telecommunication in Education and Organisation in Denmark,August 31st - September 1st 1992.

Friedman, L. B. and J. McCullough 1992. Computer conferencing as a support mechanismfor teacher-researchers in rural high schools. In Empowering Networks: Computer Confer-encing in Education, ed M. D. Waggoner, 139-155. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:Educational Technology Publications.

Galbraith, M. W. ed. 1990. Adult Learning Methods. Malabar, Florida: Krieger PublishingCompany.

Gjerløw, A. 1993. Datacommunication - a tool in planning and bringing through theSpinn-project. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 297-305. Proceedings ofthe IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25August, 1993.

Goodman, F. L. 1992. Instructional gaming through computer conferencing. In Empower-ing Networks: Computer Conferencing in Education, ed M. D. Waggoner, 101-126.Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.

Gunawardena, C. N. 1992. Changing faculty roles for audiographics and online teach-ing. The American Journal of Distance Education, 6(3):58-71.

Gundry, J. 1992 Understanding collaborative learning in networked organizations. InCollaborative Learning through Computer Conferencing: The Najaden Papers, edA. R. Kaye, 167-178. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Harasim, L. 1987. Teaching and learning on-line: Issues in computer-mediated graduatecourses. Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, 16(2):117-135.

Harasim, L. 1989. On-line education: A new domain. In Mindweave: Communications,Computers, and Distance Education, eds. R. Mason and A. Kaye, 50-62. Oxford:Pergamon Press. (http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap4.html)

Harasim, L. 1991. Teaching by computer conferencing. In Applications of ComputerConferencing to Teacher Education and Human Resource Development, ed. A. J. Miller,25-33. Proceedings from an International Symposium on Computer Conferencing at theOhio State University, June 13-15.

Harasim, L. 1992. Foreword. In From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities: DistanceEducation, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online Education, M. F. Paulsen, i-iii,University Park, Pennsylvania: The American Center for the Study of Distance Education.

Henri, F. 1988. Distance education and computer-assisted communication. Prospects18(1):85-90.




Hiltz, S. R. 1985. The Virtual Classroom: Initial Explorations of Computer-mediatedCommunication Systems as an Interactive Learning Space. Newark, NJ: New JerseyInstitute of Technology.

Hiltz, S. R. 1986. The “Virtual Classroom”: Using computer-mediated communication foruniversity teaching. Journal of Communication 36(2):95-104.

Hiltz, S. R. 1990. Evaluating the virtual classroom. In Online Education: Perspectives on aNew Environment, ed. L. M. Harasim, 133-184. New York: Praeger.

Hiltz, S. R. and M. Turoff 1978. The Network Nation: Human Communication via Com-puter. London: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Hiltz, S. R. and M. Turoff, 1985. Structuring computer-mediated communication systems toavoid information overload. Communications of the ACM, 28(7):680-689.

Hiltz, S. R., K. Johnson, and M. Turoff, 1987. Experiments in group decision making:Communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences.Human Communication Research, 13(2):225-252.

Hoffman, R. 1993. The distance brings us closer: Electronic mail, ESL Learner Writers andTeachers. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 391-399. Proceedings of theIFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25August, 1993.

Howse, W. J. 1991. Internet – The discoveries of a distance educator. DEOSNEWS1(21). (www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews1_21.asp)

Howse, W. J. 1992. The Internet: Discoveries of a Distance Educator. EDU Magazine,Spring/Summer 1992, Issue Number 58:32-35.

Hsu, E. Y. P. 1989. VC + EL = VL. Development in Business Simulation & ExperimentalExercises. Volume 17.

Hsu, E. 1990. Running management game in a computer mediated conferencing system:A case of collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the Third Guelph Symposium onComputer Mediated Communications, 201-208. Guelph, Ontario: University of Guelph.

Jenssen, A. 1992. Fjernundervisning ved USIT: Erfaringer fra utvikling og gjennomføring av”FIK - Fjernundervisning i Kommunikasjonstjenester”. Oslo: The University of Oslo.

Johnsen, T. 1992. Datakonferanser i Fjernundervisning - En Vurdering av Muligheter ogBegrensninger. Oslo: The University of Oslo.

Johnson, E. 1993. Teaching on international computer networks. TEXT Technology3(2):3-5.

Johnson-Lenz, P. and T. Johnson-Lenz. 1990. Islands of safety for unlocking human potential,In Proceedings of the Third Guelph Symposium on Computer Mediated Communications,304-25. Guelph, Ontario: University of Guelph.

Kaye, A. 1989. Computer-mediated communication and distance education. InMindweave: Communications, Computers, and Distance Education, eds. R. Mason andA. Kaye, 3-21. Oxford: Pergamon Press. (http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap1.html)

Kaye, T. 1991. Computer networking in distance education. Multiple uses: Many models.In Nordisk Konferanse om Fjernundervisning, Opplæring og Dataformidlet Kommunikasjon,






eds. A. Fjuk, A. E. Jenssen, P. Helmersen, and M. Søby, 43-51. Proceeding from anInternational Conference at the University of Oslo, August 19-20.

Kaye, A. R. 1992. Learning together apart. In Collaborative Learning through ComputerConferencing: The Najaden Papers, ed A. R. Kaye, 1-24. Berlin: Springer Verlag.

Knowles, M. S. 1980. The Modern Practice of Adult Education. From Pedagogy toAndragogy. New York: Cambridge.

Knox, A. B. 1987. Helping Adults Learn. San Francisco/London: Jossey-Bass.

Korhonen, L. J. 1990. Nominal group technique. In Adult Learning Methods, ed. M. W.Galbraith, 247-259. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

Kort, B. 1991. Computer Networks and Informal Science Education. Telecommunicationsin Education News, 2(2):22-24.

Kristensen, T. 1993. A Pedagogical network of schools in the Bergen region. In Teleteach-ing, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 523-528. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 ThirdTeleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Laird, D. 1985. Approaches to Training and Development. Reading, Massachusetts:Addison-Wesley.

Lauzon, A. C. 1992. Integrating computer-based instruction with computer conferencing:An evaluation of a model for designing online education. The American Journal of DistanceEducation, 6(2):32-46.

Levin, J., K. Haesun and M. Riel. 1990. Analyzing instructional interactions on electronicmessage networks. In Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment, ed. L.Harasim, 185-213. New York: Praeger.

Levin, S. R., E. E. Toth, and C. Douglas. 1993. Earth Day treasure hunt: Developingsuccessful activities on electronic networks. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies andB. Samways, 557-562. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference,TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Manuel, G. 1991. Power politics. Times Educational Supplement, Aug. 2nd, 1991.

Marantz, B. and R. England. 1992. Closing the distance: a CMC learning contracttutorial. DEOSNEWS 2(4). (www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews2_4.asp)

Marantz, B. and R. England. 1993. Can CMC teach teachers training? EducationalMedia International 30(2):74-77.

Marsick, V. J. 1990. Case study. In Adult Learning Methods, ed. M. W. Galbraith,225-246. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

Mason, R. D. 1989. An evaluation of CoSy on an Open University course. In Mindweave:Communications, Computers, and Distance Education, eds. R. Mason and A. Kaye,115-145. Oxford: Pergamon Press. (http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap9.html)

Mason, R. 1991. Moderating educational computer conferencing. DEOSNEWS 1(19).(www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews1_19.asp)







Mason, R. 1993. Designing collaborative work for online courses. In Teleteaching, eds.G. Davies and B. Samways, 569-578. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third TeleteachingConference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

McCreary, E. K. and J. Van Duren. 1987. Educational applications of computerconferencing. Canadian Journal of Educational Communication 16(2):107-115.

Melton, L. R. A. and N. Ismail. 1993. Distant Knowledge of Distance Education: AnOnline Database. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 591-600.Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim,Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Moore, M. G. 1990. Correspondence study. In Adult Learning Methods, ed. M. W.Galbraith, 345-365. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

Odasz, F. 1992. Grassroots networking on Big Sky Telegraph: Empowering Montana’s one-room rural schools. In Empowering Networks: Computer Conferencing in Education, ed M.D. Waggoner, 55-68. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.

O’Donnell, J. M. and R. S. Caffarella. 1990. Learning contracts. In Adult LearningMethods, ed. M. W. Galbraith, 133-160. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

O’Donoghue, M. 1993. Electronic communication projects under investigation in furthereducation. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 629-638. Proceedings ofthe IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25August, 1993.

Paulsen, M. F. 1992a. The NKI Electronic College: Five years of computer conferencing indistance education. In From Bulletin Boards to Electronic Universities: Distance Education,Computer-Mediated Communication, and Online Education, M. F. Paulsen, 2-17.University Park, Pennsylvania: The American Center for the Study of Distance Education.

Paulsen, M. F. 1992e. The 16th ICDE World Conference: Distance education for thetwenty-first century. DEOSNEWS 2(7).(www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews2_7.asp)

Paulsen, M. F. 1992f. Innovative computer conferencing courses. In From Bulletin Boards toElectronic Universities: Distance Education, Computer-Mediated Communication, andOnline Education, M. F. Paulsen, 23-30. University Park, Pennsylvania: The AmericanCenter for the Study of Distance Education.

Paulsen, M. F. and T. Rekkedal. 1990. The Electronic College: Selected Articles from theEKKO Project. Oslo: NKI Forlaget.

Phillips, G. M., G. M. Santoro, and S. A. Kuehn. 1988. The use of computer-mediatedcommunication in training students in group problem-solving and decision-making tech-niques. The American Journal of Distance Education 2(1):38-51.

Pierce, J. W. 1992. Empowering educational researchers on CompuServe and BITNET. In Empowering Networks: Computer Conferencing in Education, ed M. D. Waggoner,127-138. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.

Prims, J. C. 1993. Patterns of activity, working conditions and tools in the use of telecom-munications in Catalan schools. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways,667-674. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93,Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.




Quale, A. 1990. EKKO-base: An online multiuser selfstudy database. In The ElectronicCollege: Selected Articles from the EKKO Project, M. F. Paulsen and T. Rekkedal,115-123. Oslo: NKI Forlaget.

Quale, A. 1991. EKKO-base: An online multiuser selfstudy database. In Training: FromComputer Aided Design to Computer Integrated Enterprise, B. Z. Barta and H. Haugen(eds.), 323-331. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Ragsdale, R.G. and A. Kassam. 1993. New Technology and Traditional Classrooms.In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 675-683. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August,1993.

Rapaport, M. 1991. Computer Mediated Communications: Bulletin Boards, ComputerConferencing, Electronic Mail, and Information Retrieval. New York: John Wiley& Sons.

Rasmussen, S. A. 1993. International e-mail in language instruction. In Teleteaching, eds.G. Davies and B. Samways, 685-694. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third TeleteachingConference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Rawson, J. H. 1990. Real-time computer conferencing for distance education: In DistanceEducation: Development and Access, eds. M. Croft, I. Mugridge, J. Caniel, and A.Hershfield, 237-75. Caracas, Venezuela: ICDE.

Rekkedal, T. and M. F. Paulsen. 1989. Computer conferencing in distance education:status and trends. European Journal of Education 24(1):61-72.

Rekkedal, T. 1990. Distance education and computer conferencing: Some internationalexperiences. In Elektronisk Fjærnopplæring - Om Undervisning og Kompetanseutviklinggjennom datakommunikasjon og nettverk, ed. I. Bø, T. Carlsen, T. Rekkedal, and M. Søby,1-23. Oslo: Norwegian Center for Distance Education.

Rekkedal, T. 1990. Recruitment and study barriers in the Electronic College. In TheElectronic College: Selected Articles from the EKKO Project, eds. M. F. Paulsen and T.Rekkedal, 79-105. Oslo: NKI Forlaget.

Riel, M. 1990. Cooperative learning across classrooms in electronic learning circles.Instructional Science 19(6):445-66.

Riel, M. 1993. Global education through learning circles. In Global Networks, ed.L. M. Harasim, 221-236. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Rothwell, W. J. and H. C. Kazanas. 1989. Strategic Human Resource Development.New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Rueda, J. 1992. Collaborative learning in a large scale computer conferencing system.In Collaborative Learning through Computer Conferencing: The Najaden Papers, edA. R. Kaye, 87-101. Berlin: Springer Verlag.

Sande, O. and J. Eide 1993. The FILAM project: A low profile approach to computerizeddistance teaching. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 649-756. Proceed-ings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway,20-25 August, 1993.

Seaman, D. F. and R. A. Fellenz 1989. Effective Strategies for Teaching Adults. Columbus,Ohio: Merrill Publishing Company.



Seaton, W. J. 1993. Computer-mediated communication and student self-directed learn-ing. Open Learning, 8(2):49-54.

Sheffield, J. and R. J. McQueen. 1990. Groupware and management education: Match-ing communication medium to task requirements. In Proceedings of The Third Guelph Sym-posium on Computer Mediated Communication, 181-192. Guelph, Ontario: University ofGuelph.

Sisco, B. R. 1990. Forum, panel, and symposium. In Adult Learning Methods, ed.M. W. Galbraith, 283-301. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.

Sligte, H. W. and P. Meijer 1993. Evaluating teletrips within the European Schools Project.In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 797-807. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August,1993.

Stefansdottir, L. 1993. The Icelandic educational network - Ismennt. In Teleteaching, eds.G. Davies and B. Samways, 829-835. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third TeleteachingConference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Sternheim, M. M. and H. R. Sternheim. 1993. Lessons from the SpaceMet network. InTeleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 845-854. Proceedings of the IFIP TC3Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25 August,1993.

Stewart, D. 1993. School development at a distance using Schools Sharing InformationNetwork. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 855-864. Proceedings of theIFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim, Norway, 20-25August, 1993.

Strangelove, M. 1992. Directory of Electronic Journals and Newsletters. Ottawa, Ontario:[email protected].

Teles, L. and N. Duxbury 1991. The Networked Classroom: An Assessment of the South-ern Interior Telecommunications Project (SITP). Vancouver, Canada: Faculty of Education,Simon Fraser University.

Teles, L. 1993. Cognitive apprenticeship on global networks. In Global Networks, ed.L. M. Harasim, 271-281. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Thomas, R. 1989. The implications of electronic communication for the Open University.In Mindweave: Communications, Computers, and Distance Education, eds. R. Mason andA. Kaye, 115-145. Oxford: Pergamon Press. (http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literature-store/mindweave/chap11.html)

Tillyer, D. 1993. World peace and natural writing through e-mail. ColleagiateMicrocomputer 11(2).

Turoff, M. 1982. The EIES educational experience. A paper presented in the ConferenceBriefs for the conference Telecommunications and Higher Education. New Jersey Institute ofTechnology, April 29, 1982.

Waggoner, M. D. 1992. Explicating expert opinion: A case study of a computer confer-encing delphi. In Empowering Networks: Computer Conferencing in Education, ed.M. D. Waggoner, 157-194. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational TechnologyPublications.



http://wwwicdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap11.html

http://wwwicdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/chap11.html

mailto:[email protected]

Wells, R. 1993. The use of computer-mediated communication in distance education:Progress, problems, and trends. In Teleteaching, eds. G. Davies and B. Samways, 79-88.Proceedings of the IFIP TC3 Third Teleteaching Conference, TeleTeaching 93, Trondheim,Norway, 20-25 August, 1993.

Wired, 1994. Work at Wired. Wired 2(1):70.



Anecdote 3. Globalskolen: A Global Primary School

Online education is not only for adult students. In2002, Globalskolen (www.globalskolen.no)provided primary education for 180 Norwegianstudents abroad and 15 students in Norway.Students from 58 different countries followed

courses from Globalskolen. The students were from 6 to 15 years old. Similar initiativeshave been implemented by Netskolen (www.netskolen.dk) in Denmark and two Swedishinstitutions; Sofia Distansundervisning (www.sofiadistans.nu) and Pippis Hemskola(www.pippishemskola.nu).

Originally, Globalskolen was a pilot project primarily developed for children of Norwe-gian diplomats and missionaries living abroad. To ease the children’s return to the Norwe-gian educational system, Globalskolen provides online education in distinctive Norwegiansubjects. Now, Globalskolen attracts children from rural schools that are struggling withsmall student numbers and children of itinerant families, for example circus artists. In addi-tion, the school is popular with Norwegian families on sabbatical leave abroad, and withimmigrants on lengthy visits to their home country.

Globalskolen follows the official Norwegian curriculum in all subjects and they give weeklyindividual support to every student. There is also pupil cooperation on the Web and an onlinenewspaper for each grade. The courses are asynchronous and based on weekly work plans.

Primarily, Globalskolen offers 27 courses online. These are the three distinctive Norwe-gian subjects (Norwegian language, Religion and ethical subjects, and Social studies) from2nd to 10th grade. In addition, they teach mathematics for 10th grade and a readingpreparation course for 1st grade. Globalskolen also aims to provide as many subjectsonline as possible – perhaps with the exception of physical education, music, carpentry,and home economics.

In 2002, Globalskolen for the first time offered online education for first graders. Twelvechildren, living in Italy, Greece, USA, The Emirates, Hong Kong, Australia, Turkey,Canada, and Syria, have started to study the Norwegian language. But is it really a good

idea to teach six-year-old children online?Bente Rui, their online teacher, says: “It’s too early to evaluate the outcome

of this first online trial with six-year-old students. However so far, it has beenan incredibly enjoying, exciting, and creative pedagogic challenge.”

“I have used a multi media program to develop a weekly work planthat includes pictures, sound, animations and interactive quizzes. Usingthis, the children have increased their proficiency in the Norwegian

language through systematic use of basic Norwegian concepts andphrases.”


www.globalskolen.no

www.netskolen.dk

www.sofiadistans.nu

www.pippishemskola.nu

“The parents are important partners for me, and they work as my personal teachingassistants for their children. It is, however, interesting and stimulating to see that the childrenalready have started to take some responsibility for their own learning. The feedback theparents provide regarding the children’s involvement is exclusively positive. As their onlineteacher, I’m very proud of my clever first-graders. And I tell them so, in the weekly reports Isend them.”

Glenn Erik Haugland is a Norwegian composer spending one year in Italy with hisfamily. Since his two daughters are students at Globalskolen, he decided to become theparents’ online contact for the 10th graders. He provides the following comments:

“Our experiences are exclusively positive. The online teachers are very competent, and theonline learning environment supports reflective thinking. Since Globalskolen relies much on writ-ten communication, I have noticed that the children’s writing and reading skills have increased.The school provides a learning arena – the Internet – that caters to the pupils’ lifestyle and inter-ests. It also helps them to develop work habits that they will benefit from in the future.”

Principal Helge Standal confirms that parent evaluation of Globalskolen for some yearson average have been between 4 and 5 on a scale from 1 (worst) to 6 (best). He alsostates that Globalskolen’s students receive grades that on average are equal to or betterthan the grades in the teachers’ ordinary schools.

“We have 10 online tutors,” says Standal. “They teach face-to-face courses in ordinaryschools, but have a reduced workload in their schools because they also handle onlineteaching. The tutors sign a contract that includes a description of their responsibilities. Wehave established a separate discussion forum for the tutors, and we organize two face-to-face seminars per year for the tutors. We have also given them tools for design of graphicmaterial and multimedia content. The tutors develop weekly schedules and publish themonline via PedIT, our LMS system. Our instructional designer develops other resources usingFrontPage or DreamWeaver. We have little use of animations and video, because of band-width limitation, especially in some countries.”

“In 2000 we developed and mailed a VHS videocassette to all students in the schoolyear 2000/01. The video explains and describes how the students should use ourresources and how they can study effectively online. The students receive individual feed-back on their written assignments, but we also develop open resource pages, in which wefor example provide guidance on common problems with spelling Norwegian words. Weuse quizzes. Globalskolen does not offer any exams, but the tutors grade the studentsbased on their participation in the discussion forums and the assignments they submit. Wealso organize some comprehensive semester tests with help from the students’ parents.”

“Globalskolen provides a common discussion forum, which is open to all our students.In addition we have one discussion forum for each of the courses we teach. We do notusually organize any online chatting, because our students are situated around the globe,so the time difference inhibits effective use of chatting. However, some students do organ-ize informal chatting in smaller groups. We have established a general chatting service.Through this, each student may invite other users to chat sessions. The teachers managediscussion forums.”


“The school’s online journal is used as a pedagogical tool in the way that the studentspublish articles that are available for everyone on the Web. We perceive this as an inspi-ration for improved work, compared to traditional assignments that are only meant for theteacher. The journal and other resources are open and available to everybody, also stu-dents in traditional Norwegian schools. The workbook feature is elegant. It allows the tutorto follow the students’ progress and observe whenever a student contributes to a discussionforum or completes an assignment.”

A company owned by four municipalities in western Norway established Globalskolenin 1998. The school has received several project grants from the Ministry of Education, butthe students must still pay a € 500 fee for three subjects. The external grants have beeninsecure sources of income, but so far they have covered the wages. The school needs tofind more sustainable sources of income to secure future operations.

The Danish pilot project Netskolen (www.netskolen.dk) was in operation from March 1stto June 1st 2001. It included 4 teachers and 47 children in 24 countries. In the finalreport, the project group testified that both children and parents had shown great engage-ment and that the interest from the target group had been enormous. One of the projectcoordinators, Jytte Fromberg, states that Netskolen had a waiting list of 250 children livingabroad who wanted to enroll. In spite of this, the Danish pilot project was not sustained,and the Danish Ministry of Education has not made any decision about continuation of theproject.


www.netskolen.dk

COMMERCIAL AND SELF-DEVELOPED LMS SYSTEMS

“Straitjackets!” a friend of mine hissed with malice in his voice, when I discussed [LMSsystems] with him the other day. (Page 228)

…the Student Management System is the central, most important system for large-scaleonline education. For historical, legal, and financial reasons, the SMS system is the mostimportant system for an educational institution. Hence, all other systems that offer onlineeducation services should rely on the SMS system as the master system with which theyexchange data. (Page 28)

The analysis revealed few, if any, examples of institutions with substantial income fromstudent fees. Likewise, there seem to be few institutions that can claim that provision ofWeb-based courses has been an economic success, if they disregard external researchand development grants. (Page 139)

Evidence of the worldwide spread of e-learning in recent years is easy to obtain. In April2003, no fewer than 66,000 fully online courses and 1,200 complete online programswere listed on the TeleCampus portal…(Page 152)

The institutions do not seem to be especially loyal to, or dependent on, one LMS system.The majority of the institutions had changed system, planned to change system, or operatedsecondary systems. (Page 167)

…the organisational and pedagogical concepts underpinning most modern LMS systems fitbadly with Danish educational culture and with the way Danish educational institutionstraditionally organise learner support and learner management. (Page 228)


Part Two

Figure 10. The Troll with three heads: Learning, Management and System

…it is important to understand that LMS systems may be built on very different pedagogicalmethods and theories and that these underlying constraints may influence and limit thesystems pedagogical use. (Page 31)



www.studymentor.com

International Web-basedEducation and StrategicRecommendations forDecision Makers

The results and discussions presented in this article3 are based on literature reviews, cata-logue entries submitted by 130 institutions in 26 countries, and 72 interviews with keypersons at these institutions. The catalogue data was collected from March 98 to February99 and the interviews were conducted in the spring of 1999. The research was conductedwithin the Cisaer project (www.nettskolen.com/in_english/cisaer/index.html), which wassupported by the European Leonardo da Vinci program.

Global IssuesThe Cisaer catalogue includes entries from institutions in all continents. In addition to fourtransnational institutions, the catalogue includes entries from institutions in 26 countries. It islikely that there is an overrepresentation of institutions from countries that have English as anofficial language since the primary research language was English. Still, it would be quiteeasy to include many more entries from North America, since the listing from this area isintentionally partial. Among the 130 catalogue entries, 45.4% were from the English lan-guage countries: the USA, UK, Australia, Canada, and Ireland.

There is a steady growth of institutions that offer online courses to students in othercountries, and the analysis presents many examples of international collaboration andthinking. However, most of the global initiatives seem to be experiments and ambitionsrather than main priorities. Most institutions or consortia have not identified internationalmarkets as an initial priority.



3 This article presents an abstract of the major findings and recommendations from my report OnlineEducation – An International Analysis of Web-based Education and Strategic Recommendations for DecisionMakers (Paulsen 2000).

www.studymentor.com

www.nettskolen.com/in_english/cisaer/index.html

CompetitivenessThe survey indicates that institutions in Europe (60.8%), North America (21.5%), andAustralia with New Zealand (7.7%) overwhelmingly outnumber institutions in South America(3.1%), Asia (3.1%), and Africa (0.8%). Even though the researchers have a better know-ledge of Europe, North America, and Australia than they have of the rest of the world, thesurvey testifies that these continents overwhelmingly dominate Web-based education.

North America dominates the world of online education. Some of the reasons for thisdominance are the well-developed Internet infrastructure, the economic strength of the edu-cational providers, the international dominance of the English language, the well-developed university systems, and the famous brand-name universities.

The linguistic diversity in Europe is problematic for global competitiveness. Hence, UKproviders seem to have a more international approach than providers in other Europeancountries. Different national systems of degrees, certificates, and grades also make it moredifficult to compete globally. European harmonization of these systems will increase com-petitiveness. Further, unlike North America, higher education in Europe is largely statefunded, and this could entail resistance to change and become a barrier to competitive-ness. The most obvious example is that national regulations in countries such as Swedenand Germany prevent institutions from charging tuition fees.

The Australian institutions are among the largest and most advanced in this analysis.Since the courses are also provided in English, Australian institutions should be very com-petitive in the emerging global market.

Institutional IssuesA Canadian competitive analysis of online post-secondary education (Massey and Curry,1999) reports that the biggest surprise was the lack of institutional strategy for online learn-ing initiatives.

A large number of the Cisaer institutions offer few Web-courses. As many as 23.1% of theinstitutions report having only one Web-course, and 46.2% of them report offering less than 5courses. Only four institutions reported having 100 courses or more. From this, one can inferthat many of the activities are experimental and not pivotal for the institutions. The survey alsoshowed that 29.3% of the institutions report that they have 100 or fewer students. Only fourinstitutions reported having more than 5,000 students. The relatively low enrollment numbersalso indicate that Web-based instruction is not pivotal to these institutions.

One may conclude that there is a dominance of Web-courses in the fields of computerand information science and by courses in education. Except for these two fields, web-courses cover a very broad range of subjects. The number of subject areas that wereoffered varied considerably between the institutions. Nearly half of the institutions offercourses in only one category and only five offered courses in five or more categories.

None of the institutions surveyed seem to provide enough online courses and supportservices so that this analysis would characterize them as real online or virtual universities.



The survey shows that 60.0% of the 130 institutions belong to the university and collegesector, 10.0% to the traditional open university and distance education sector, and 9.2%were classified as companies or corporations.

Administrative IssuesAn administrative system should be able to handle students, teachers, courses, and coursematerial. An online college may have to handle thousands of students, hundreds of teach-ers, and a large number of courses with password restricted Web pages, discussionforums, distribution lists, class rosters, and student presentations. It may also have to provideadministrative systems for the dispatch of textbooks, handling of tuition and examinationfees, and organization of local examinations. These services constitute a major challengefor many traditional institutions.

Institutions that plan to offer large-scale and professional online education need an LMSsystem that is integrated with the Web. To accomplish this, institutions may follow severalstrategies. The simplest strategy is probably to collaborate with an institution that alreadyhas a functional administrative system. Another solution, which requires more technical com-petence, is to develop an in-house system based on common Internet services. The thirdoption is to purchase a standard LMS system for online education. These standard systemsare continually being improved, but they may still need much local adaptation. They mayonly meet some of the administrative needs, and they could place some pedagogicallimitations on the courses.

A discouraging but important observation is that a number of institutions do not use theWeb for administrative purposes. Outsourcing is an option that does not seem to be muchused; only one instance was identified. Many institutions have developed in-house admini-strative solutions in combinations with standard Internet software. The standard LMS systemsthat were mentioned in the interviews were FirstClass, WebCT, and Lotus Notes.

Advertising and Financial IssuesIt is implicit in many interviews that advertising of programs and courses is an importantfunction of the Web services.

The tuition fees for Web courses seem to vary considerably among institutions andcourses. Some courses are free and open to everyone, and others seem to have full orpartial external funding. One may ask how many of these initiatives will continue when theexternal funding ceases. The institutions that operate with tuition fees seem to have fees thatare the same or not very different from fees in traditional courses. The analysis revealedfew, if any, examples of institutions with substantial income from student fees. Likewise,there seem to be few institutions that can claim that provision of Web-based courses hasbeen an economic success, if they disregard external research and development grants.

I N T E R N AT I O N A L W E B - B A S E D E D U C AT I O N


Pedagogical IssuesThe tutors seem to be both part-time teachers that are engaged just for the online coursesand full-time teachers that also teach some online courses. It is also interesting to observethat remote experts and students take part in the tutoring.

An analysis of the interviews indicates that the tutors at least conduct the followingfunctions, which are extracted from the statements below:

■ Organizational functions: structure discussions, pacing, submitting initiatives■ Social functions: monitoring groups■ Intellectual functions: answering questions, guiding students on the Internet■ Assessment functions: giving feedback to assignments, correcting submissions

Human tutoring seems to be much more common than machine tutoring, but some institu-tions include machine tutoring in addition to human tutoring. Most institutions seem tocombine individual tutoring with group tutoring. The focus between the two may howevervary. Online teaching is in many courses supplemented by face-to-face meetings, video oraudio conferences, or telephone contact.

Some institutions have course development teams; others use the tutor as the soledesigner of a course. The different models probably have implications for both qualitycontrol and development time.

AccreditationThe interview analysis implies that accreditation of online courses and programs is very sim-ilar to the institutions’ traditional accreditation schemes. Degrees, diplomas, certificates,and statements of completions are all widely used. The accreditation seems to be the sameindependently of whether the course or program is offered online or not. Many institutionsbasically state that accreditation is the same as for campus courses.

Accreditation may be an important competitive advantage and several strategies maybe followed to achieve the necessary accreditation. Collaboration with institutions in othercountries may result in bilateral accreditation.

AssessmentWhile summative assessment of online courses seems to be very traditional and often has a face-to-face component, formative assessment is more experimental and based on online activities.

Most of the institutions apply several assessment methods in a course or program. Tutorassessment is the most common form of assessment found in the interviews. The interviewsreveal many examples of self-assessment, but they imply that computer assessment isrelatively scarce. However, there are several examples of online quizzes, multiple-choicetests, and some examples of interactive exercises. The interview analysis implies that peer



assessment is relatively scarce. The interviews indicate that some courses have noassessment simply because they are self-study courses with no tutors.

Enrollment and Progress FlexibilityBoth enrollment and progress can be more or less flexible. However, the two main modelsfound in the interviews are group enrollment and progress and individual enrollment andprogress. These models represent two different strategies that have important consequencesfor marketing strategies, administrative systems, and pedagogical approaches.

The interviews testify that group-based enrollment and progression is far more used thanindividual enrollment and progression. The analysis identified 46 institutions that used thegroup model and 12 that followed the individual model. In addition, 11 institutions offeredboth models.

The preponderance of the group model may come from conventional thinking that sus-tain the semester and term system in traditional educational systems. Another possiblereason is that the institutions have a well-considered perception that teamwork and collabo-rative learning are hard to achieve with individual enrollment and progress. One can how-ever argue that many students will prefer individual flexibility and that many institutions lacksystems, structures, and competence concerning individual enrollment and progression. Ifso, one might hypothesize that open universities and distance teaching institutions shouldbe more disposed toward individual flexibility than traditional universities and colleges.However, the analysis has not found evidence to support this hypothesis.

Future DevelopmentThe interest in online education is high, and it seems to be proliferating rapidly and globally.A Canadian analysis (Massey and Curry, 1999) shows that the primary expansion strate-gies are more diversified programs, international students, and new, niche markets such ascorporate training. The Cisaer interviewees foresaw a future with more Web courses, addi-tional online services, better quality in courses, enhanced focus on teacher training, furthercollaboration with other institutions, and additional organizational consequences.

BarriersThere are a number of barriers that must be overcome before online education can becomea large-scale success. Among them are financial barriers, resistance to change, bandwidthlimitations, access limitations, insufficient search facilities, copyright issues, and barriers toonline assessment.

The financial barriers are important. The analysis showed that few institutions had sub-stantial income from student fees. At the same time, the cost of development and mainte-nance could be high. In addition, national regulations in some countries deny institutionsthe opportunity to charge tuition fees.



The interviews testify that there are a number of barriers to effective use of online assess-ment. Among them are public and institutional regulations, traditions for physical attendance,technical limitations, student identification, and detection of plagiarized digital material.

Eight Strategic Online EducationRecommendationsIn conclusion, the report provides the eight recommendations for politicians, educationaladministrators, and online educators that are presented in List 5.

List 5. Eight strategic online education recommendations

1. Promote national and international harmonization of degrees, certificates, credits, andgrades to facilitate online mobility of students. There is a steady growth of institutionsthat offer online courses to students in other countries, and the analysis presentsmany examples of international collaboration and thinking. However, most of theglobal initiatives seem to be experiments and ambitions rather than main priorities.One important barrier is the problems with acceptance of foreign degrees, certifi-cates, credits, and grades as an integral part of education and professional devel-opment. International collaboration would benefit from harmonization of theseimportant issues. North American universities may have a competitive advantagecompared with Europe since they have a relatively long tradition of credit transfer.Accreditation could be an important competitive advantage and several strate-gies could be followed to achieve the necessary accreditation. Collaborationwith institutions in other countries could result in bilateral accreditation.

2. Oppose national regulations that inhibit institutions from charging tuition fees. Acountry should allow its universities and colleges to charge tuition fees forWeb-based courses. Countries that don’t can hardly expect to be competitivein the emerging global educational marketplace. Tuition fees can stimulatechange, facilitate collaboration between institutions, and be an incentive forexport of courses. Examples from both Germany and Sweden show that thesecountries’ restrictions are perceived as a barrier to online education.

3. Focus on cost-effective online education. The analysis indicates that there are fewinstitutions that can claim that provision of Web-based courses has been aneconomic success, if they disregard external research and development grants.At the same time, most of the Webcourses have relatively low enrollment. Thecost of development and maintenance may be high, and there are many exam-ples of expensive pilot projects that experiment with high-cost, state-of-the arttechnology. All this implies that it is necessary to focus much more on howonline education could become more cost-effective. This includes a focus onhow online courses could handle larger enrollment and prioritizing cost-effective technology and development schemes.



4. Develop better systems for administration of online education. Institutions that plan tooffer large-scale, professional online education need an administrative systemthat is integrated with the web. A discouraging, but important observation isthat a number of institutions do not use the web for administrative purposes.Many administrative solutions are primitive, and much could be done toimprove most of the existing systems. The commercial LMS systems are continu-ously being improved, but they may still need much local adaptation. Theymay only meet some of the administrative needs, and they could place somepedagogical limitations on the courses.

5. Support initiatives for training of online teachers, administrators, and instructional design-ers. Online education is a new field with little research and practical experience.Practitioners need more knowledge and experience. Initiatives to disseminateexisting research, examples of good practice, and training should be supported.

6. Oppose regulations and attitudes that inhibit online assessment. Assessment systemsare strong indicators of how seriously course providers value their aims. Onecould argue that summative assessment is such an important issue for students,teachers, and course providers that experimentation with online assessmentfunctions is risky and hard to find support for. Two obvious challenges foronline assessment are authentication of student identification and detection ofplagiarized digital material. Other barriers are public and institutional regula-tions, traditions for physical attendance, and technical limitations. These barri-ers to online assessment counteract the development of online education sincethey support face-to-face attendance and preserve traditional education.While summative assessment of online courses seems to be very traditional andoften has a face-to-face component, formative assessment is more experimentaland based on online activities.

7. Support further research on online pedagogy and didactics. There are several dis-tinct features that characterize online teaching techniques (see page 53). Thesefeatures provide teaching opportunities that can rarely be achieved in othereducational environments. They could probably add a new dimension tofamiliar teaching techniques and also contribute to the development of anumber of new, innovative teaching techniques.

8. Develop and implement strategies to reduce teacher workload. A major concernarising from the research was how to keep teacher workload at an acceptablelevel. Hence, it is important to develop and implement strategies to reduce theworkload per student associated with large-scale enrollment. (See page 76)



ReferencesMassey, C. And J. Curry. 1999. Online Post-Secondary Education: A CompetitiveAnalysis. TeleLearning Inc.

Paulsen, M. F. 2000. Online Education, An International Analysis of Web-based Educationand Strategic Recommendations for Decision Makers. Oslo: NKI Forlaget(http://home.nettskolen.nki.no/~morten/artikler/Online_Education.pdf)



http://home.nettskolen.nki.no/~morten/artikler/Online_Education.pdf

Anecdote 4. OnlineEducation ObituariesSuccessful online education should be sustainable. It is therefore of great concern that muchof the online education that has been offered so far has been transient, unsuccessful andfar from sustainable. A lot of it has been supported by external funding and ended whenthe external funding stopped. It is also disturbing to observe that there are many onlineeducation projects supported by Scandinavian councils and agencies (e.g. the NorwegianSOFF, ITU, NFR, the Swedish Nätuniversitetet, and the Danish CTU) that have come up withhigh quality products that are not used after the project period. Enormous amounts ofmoney have more or less been wasted. It is therefore important to study initiatives that lacksustainability and understand some of the reasons for this. A first attempt is provided in thisarticle, which discusses five types of online education ventures and points out someconspicuous, high-profile initiatives that hardly could be characterized as sustainable.

The reader should be aware that these issues are controversial and that the analysesmay be characterized as subjective and one-dimensional. However, they introduce somevery important issues that need to be discussed and analyzed in further details.

1. Many governmental online education initiatives have not been sustainable. These initiativesare often very visible and expensive. Some reasons for the problems might be inconsistentpolicy due to changing governments and political disagreements. Compromises and lackof market knowledge may also contribute to sub-optimal decisions as indicated in theseexamples:

Winix was an LMS system that the Norwegian Ministry of Education initiated in 1988.According to a 1994 article in Computerworld Norway4, the Office of the AuditorGeneral (Riksrevisjonen) showed that the project spent more than € 10 million in thenineties. In 1992, it was clear that the project had failed. The software was not finishedon time, and several companies that depended on Winix lost much money.

The Danish Ministries of Education and Research initiated a Danish Virtual University in amission statement on March 27, 2000. The € 5 million budget for the period 2000-2003was intended to support the development of Web-based courses and provide informationabout the courses. The next government shut down the initiative, partly as a result of lackingsupport from the affected institutions. The only remaining result seems to be a portal provid-ing information about further and continuing education (www.unev.dk) that was initiated bythe Danish University Rectors’ Conference and scheduled to open in August 2003.

Distum (page 251) was established by the Swedish Ministry of Education in July 1999with the aim of supporting the development and use of information technology in distanceeducation. But it takes time to make an impact at national level, and the necessary politicalpatience was not available. Distum was discontinued after three years when the Ministrydecided to support a new political initiative named Nätuniversitetet.


4 www.oslo.net/historie/CW/utg/9427/cw942741.html

www.unev.dk

www.oslo.net/historie/CW/utg/9427/cw942741.html

IT Fornebu Knowation (www.mml.no) was a result of the controversial political decision toestablish a world-class research and development center for information and communica-tion technology when the old Oslo International Airport was shut down in 1998. Accord-ing to Aftenposten5, the project was the subject of continual political and bureaucraticquarreling. Some critics claimed that the project’s main objective was to secure valuablereal estate properties in an attractive area. The center needed educational enterprises andIT Fornebu Knowation was a key player to attract educational activity. A number of video-conference studios were located and planned around the country. The opponents of theproject claimed that the selected technology and locations were chosen to get the neces-sary support from local members of parliament. According to Hegnar Online6 and Digi7,the company experienced a difficult economic situation, and has more or less disappearedafter several reorganizations and a merger with AjourIT8 in 2001.

2. Online education consortia are often not sustainable. It is easy to find good reasons forcollaboration between educational institutions, but in real life individuals and institutionsusually are much more committed to themselves than to the consortium. In general, one maysuspect that a consortium of prestigious institutions hardly can be whole-hearted. A rela-tively weak external consortium secretariat could easily be overlooked or opposed bypowerful factions within the institutions. There is also a chance that individual institutes,departments, and even institutions could compete with the consortium in bids for externalcontracts. This is obviously not a viable environment for a consortium.

California Virtual University (CVU) was a high profile venture9 with a dismal history10.It was launched in April 1997 as a joint project of the University of California, CaliforniaState University, California Community Colleges and the Association of IndependentCalifornia Colleges and Universities. In April 1999, Stephen Downes wrote an interestinganalysis11 claiming that the CVU dream lay in ruins. In his analysis, he stated:

While on the one hand this is just another story of an unprofitable enterprise bitingthe dust, on the other hand it is a story of wider impact because CVU was seen insome quarters as a model for the future. The failure will affect online learning ingeneral, and the reasons for the collapse attributed to weaknesses in the mediumas a whole.


5 www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/okonomi/d210445.htm6 www.hegnar.no/hegnar/newsdet.asp?id=85490&cat=1007 www.digi.no/php/art.php?id=534568 www.ajourit.no/Nyheter/nyheter_visartikkel.asp?NID=649 www.ucsf.edu/daybreak/1998/06/05_cvu.html10 www.ucsc.edu/oncampus/currents/98-99/04-05/ucop.virtual.htm11 www.atl.ualberta.ca/downes/threads/column041499.htm

www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/okonomi/d210445.htm

www.hegnar.no/hegnar/newsdet.asp?id=85490&cat=100

www.digi.no/php/art.php?id=53456

www.ajourit.no/Nyheter/nyheter_visartikkel.asp?NID=64

www.ucsf.edu/daybreak/1998/06/05_cvu.html

www.ucsc.edu/oncampus/currents/98-99/04-05/ucop.virtual.htm

www.atl.ualberta.ca/downes/threads/column041499.htm

www.mml.no

The three Swedish distance education consortia have received considerable governmentalfunding since 1993-94 (Hillefors et al, 22 and Ranebo 2001). At most, the three consortiaoffered 40-50 courses to 5,000-6,000 students per year (Hillefors et al., 26). After nearlyten years of operation, their funding was discontinued when the government decided toestablish Nätuniversitetet. Apart from the lack of funding, Holmberg (page 251) pointed outthat the consortia had difficulties in building the necessary fundament of knowledge to beefficient producers and deliverers of distance education.

Bedriftsuniversitetet (www.bedriftsuniversitetet.no) was a consortium established as acompany in 2000 by four prestigious Norwegian institutions: the University of Oslo, Nor-wegian University of Science and Technology, Norwegian School of Management, andthe SINTEF research institute. The aim was to offer online education to corporations andorganizations. In April 2003, the general assembly decided to shut down the operation.A messages posted at Bedriftsuniversitetet’s homepage referred to a decreasing market fortailor-made competency building at college and university level, and stated that there wasno basis for continuation of a company at the costs a consortium requires.

3. Many commercial and investor-driven online education initiatives have failed. E-learningwas depicted as a lucrative investment during the dot-com period. Numerous speculativeprojects attracted investors with high expectations and most of these projects vanishedwhen the dot-com bubble burst. Some persist, but are still struggling to survive. The dot-cominitiatives initiated unrealistic hype of online education; unfortunately their demise resulted inan equally undeserved pessimism.

A disturbing number of e-learning companies in Scandinavia have disappeared throughmergers and bankruptcies. According to Holmberg’s discussion of Swedish commercial ini-tiatives (page 247), many e-learning ventures started and ended between 1997 and2002, but K-World was probably the most expensive experience for the Swedish e-learn-ing market. Using the two keywords e-learning and bankrupt in a web search at www.idg.sealso revealed articles12 indicating that the e-learning companies Grade, M2S, andDoorways Education had experienced dire economic problems in Sweden.

Many universities have also failed in their commercial online education ventures. In aMay 16, 2003, Times Higher Educational Supplement, Stephen Phillips wrote:

“In March, Columbia University cut its losses on Fathom.com, having run up a$25 million (£15.5 million) investment tab on the online education portal. TheNew York-based venture was perhaps the last vestige of the brash 1990s when aslew of universities tried to cash in on their intellectual capital to corner the nascente-learning market. The universities of New York, Cornell, Temple and the Universityof Maryland University College have folded commercial internet education armsor scaled back ambitions amid poor enrollment and tough economic conditions.”


12 Articles by Karin Lindstrom in Computer Sweden, June 24, 2002, and Ulrika Halvarsson in IndustryStandard, January 30, 2001.

www.bedriftsuniversitetet.no

www.idg.se

4. Boardroom initiatives often fail. These may be described as top-down initiatives with insuffi-cient support in the operative units. Sometimes boardroom initiatives decide to establishcompletely new ventures that initially lack both competent employees and an establishedbusiness concept.

In the US, the Western Governors University (www.wgu.edu/wgu/index.html) has oftenbeen mentioned as a prominent, expensive and unfortunate example that has enduredmany setbacks and shown few results. The initiative is however still in operation.13

NKN14 (www.nkn.no) was a commercial company established in August 2000. It wasowned by the Confederation of Norwegian Business and Industry (www.nho.no), theNorwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (www.lo.no), and Telenor (www.telenor.no),which is the largest telecommunication company in Norway. The powerful owner institu-tions wanted to show their vigor and dedication to supporting further and continuingeducation in the workforce. The dot-com hype also helped the initiation of NKN. It wasprimarily a provider of LMS services to companies (customers) in collaboration with courseand content providers (partners). But NKN was never able to cover its costs and the share-holders lost nearly € 10 million15. To avoid the bad publicity of a bankruptcy, the ownersdecided to pay off the creditors with about € 1 million and to sell NKN to the CEO for asymbolic sum in 2002.

5. Several high profile international ventures have been discontinued because of an unhealthyeconomy. Even though online education is gradually becoming more global, there havebeen many unsuccessful initiatives.

EuroPACE was a European industry-university consortium that delivered high-level trainingprograms to professionals, managers and researchers in enterprises and higher educationinstitutions via satellite and computer networks. According to Wim Van Petegam16, it wasmodeled on an American concept with collaboration between universities and industrialconcerns after an initiative by British Telecom, Hewlett-Packard, Philips and Thomson. Thedevelopment started in 1986, and between 1987 and 1992, EuroPACE broadcastseveral hours of video lectures every day. It primarily used instructional television, candidclassroom, and talking heads. Important conceptual models were Stanford University andNational Technological University. EuroPACE provided courses within cutting-edge research


13 www.edexcellence.net/SR2/1%20-%20Winter%202002/Higher%20Education%5CPlace.PDF14 Information about NKN is available at:

(www.saba.com/english/news_events/2000/news_000815_norway_faq.htm)(www.cw360.com/Article21659.htm)(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/881428.stm)(www.tmag.co.uk/articles/Nov2000pg26.html)(www.digi.no/digi98.nsf/pub/jobb20000816144142tkw24617532)

15 (http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/5H32QL)16 www.publicservice.co.uk/pdf/europe/spring2003/EU5%20Wim%20Van%20Petegam%20

ATL%20.pdf

www.wgu.edu/wgu/index.html

www.nkn.no

www.nho.no

www.lo.no

www.telenor.no

www.edexcellence.net/SR2/1%20-%20Winter%202002/Higher%20Education%5CPlace.PDF

www.saba.com/english/news_events/2000/news_000815_norway_faq.htm

www.cw360.com/Article21659.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/881428.stm

www.tmag.co.uk/articles/Nov2000pg26.html

www.digi.no/digi98.nsf/pub/jobb20000816144142tkw24617532

http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/5H32QL

www.publicservice.co.uk/pdf/europe/spring2003/EU5%20Wim%20Van%20Petegam%20 www.publicservice.co.uk/pdf/europe/spring2003/EU5%20Wim%20Van%20Petegam%20ATL%20.pdf

and development areas. World-class researchers and experts from business and researchorganization were engaged as lecturers. The idea was to share limited expertise andresources. The courses were distributed via television satellites, and computer networkswere used for feedback and interaction. About 1,200 hours of content was produced from1989 until EuroPACE was shut down. However, EuroPACE did not succeed in becomingself-supporting, and in 1992 the main sponsors decided to end the financing.

EuroPACE was not sustainable. According to a former employee, the timing was rightwith regard to instructional television, but perhaps somewhat early for computer networks.But the American model was not easily transferred to Europe. EuroPACE did not cover thelast mile into the corporations, and when companies had to reduce costs, EuropPacespending was the first to be cut – as education often is.

The story has a prelude, though. In 1993, a new organization (www.europace.org)was established with the same name and similar objectives at the University of Leuven inBelgium.

In 1998, the British Open University (OU) established the United States Open University(USOU) as an independent US-based institution17. Ranked in the top ten among British uni-versities for the quality of its teaching, the British OU sought to develop a sister institution inthe US. The OU had achieved quality at scale, enrolling over 200,000 students in the UKand Europe. However the US market was more competitive and the OU brand identity littleknown in the US. USOU offered baccalaureate and master’s degrees in business, comput-ing and IT, and the liberal arts. It developed nationally recognized programs with commu-nity colleges and joint degree programs with major US universities. However, not all Britishaspects of the academic or business models worked successfully in the US. USOU evolvedfrom producer-driven, largely undergraduate courses and systems derived from the UK to aUS-market-led institution based on partnerships and graduate programs. Marketing shiftedfrom students to institutions. Enrollments increased considerably every semester from fall2000 to fall 2001, but revenues failed to grow fast enough. So, the British OU decided toterminate the project and shut down the activity. On February 5, 2002, MacLeod wrote:

After nearly four years and a £9m investment, the United States Open Universityhad signed up only 560 students and saw no short-term prospect of improvementin the current economic downturn. The USOU board announced the universitywould cease operations at the end of the semester in June.(http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,9830,645198,00.html)


17 www.distance-educator.com/dnews/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=6209

www.europace.org

www.distance-educator.com/dnews/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=6209

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,9830,645198,00.html

Concluding RemarkThe preceding examples show that there is an abundance of non-sustainable online educa-tion initiatives. This does not necessarily mean that the initiatives have been failures; theymay have been useful in many ways to individuals, institutions, and society. However hope-fully, the examples can help us avoid some future failures.

But the toughest question still remains to be answered: What online education initiativesmight be sustainable? The answer is worth a research grant.

ReferencesHillefors, L., B. Myringer, B. Svanteson, I. Rathsman, and M. Gisselberg, 2001. Ett Nät-universitet för livslångt lärande och kompetensutveckling. Rapport från en utredning utfördpå uppdrag av styrelserna för Distanskonsortiet, Svenska Distanshögskolan ock Västsvenskakonsortiet för flexibelt lärande. (www.mh.se/flexforum/flexibelt/Natuniversitet.pdf)

Ranebo, S. 2001. A Nordic Survey of National Initiatives for the Development of VirtualUniversities. Nordiska ministerrådets IT-policygrupp. (www.norden.org/it-p/dok/NORDIC_VIRTUAL_UNIVERSITIES.pdf)


www.norden.org/it-p/dok/NORDIC_VIRTUAL_UNIVERSITIES.pdf

www.mh.se/flexforum/flexibelt/Natuniversitet.pdf

European LMS Experiences

AbstractThis article18 presents an analysis of LMS systems, which was conducted in 2001 and2002 for the European Web-edu project(www.nettskolen.com/in_english/webedusite/index.html). Data was collected from in-depth interviews with 113 European experts, usually the systems managers in the institu-tions, in 17 countries. The analyses of the interviews revealed as many as 52 differentcommercial and 35 self-developed LMS systems. The article presents the data from theseinterviews and includes a series of important findings from the study.

One conclusion is that there are a host of commercial and self-developed systems thatseem to work satisfactorily in various educational institutions throughout Europe. The systemsare not able to handle all the functions the institutions want, and they can be improved inmany ways. But most systems encountered in the analyses seem to be good enough forhandling online education successfully.

The analysis indicates that the North American systems BlackBoard, WebCT, FirstClass,and Lotus Learning Space are among the most used LMS systems in Europe. This is notsurprising since these also are among the dominating systems on the international market.However, the European market is not dominated by the American LMS systems. In countriesthat do not use English as the first language, locally developed LMS systems have success-fully ousted the American products.

A large number of the LMS systems used in Europe are commercial systems developedlocally, or self-developed systems built by the institutions. The analysis indicates that theEuropean systems TopClass, Classfronter, Tutor2000, and Luvit are much used LMSsystems, at least in some regions of Europe. It seems that these commercial systems mayhave a competitive advantage in their local markets since they often have a relatively goodlocal representation and support of local languages.

There are also remarkably many European institutions that use self-developed LMSsystems, and there may be many covert and vicarious reasons for choosing self-developed



18 This article is based on my article Paulsen, M. F. Experiences with Learning Management Systems in113 European Institutions. Educational Technology & Society, 6(4), available athttp://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/6_4/index.html. The article is included in the book withpermission from the Editor.

www.nettskolen.com/in_english/webedusite/index.html

www.studymentor.com

http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/6_4/index.html

systems. But the analysis indicates that these institutions perceive the commercial systems asexpensive and complex. The self-developed systems surmount linguistic problems and areregarded as supportive of special needs and target groups.

IntroductionEvidence of the worldwide spread of e-learning in recent years is easy to obtain. In April2003, no fewer than 66,000 fully online courses and 1,200 complete online programswere listed on the TeleCampus portal from TeleEducation, New Brunswick, Canada(http://courses.telecampus.edu). It is also interesting to observe that 4,500 of the courseswere listed as free. The portal includes information about a very broad range of courseswith URLs for each course, making it easy for prospective students to study course sum-maries with a view to enrolling. In spite of the comprehensiveness of the TeleEducationdatabase, up till now about 90% of the listed courses have been from the United Statesand Canada. Even though the courses represent 17 different languages, it is unlikely thatthe portal lists many of the courses provided by the 113 European institutions studied in thisreport.

Much of the success of e-learning can be attributed to the availability of LearningManagement Systems (LMS), also known as Virtual Learning Environments (VLE) or learningplatforms. An LMS enables an institution to develop electronic learning materials forstudents, to offer these courses electronically to students, to test and evaluate the studentselectronically, and to generate electronically student databases in which student results andprogress can be charted.

Hall (2003) defines an LMS as: ”software that automates the administration of trainingevents. All Learning Management Systems manage the log-in of registered users, managecourse catalogs, record data from learners, and provide reports to management.”

In 2001 and 2002, the Web-edu project focused on the satisfaction, or lack of satis-faction, that European institutions have with the LMS systems that they have purchased ordeveloped themselves. This is a timely analysis because in the English-speaking world themajor American LMS providers dominate the e-learning industry. This is in spite of the factthat a number of these originated in Europe. WebCT, was developed by Murray Goldbergat the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada and then sold to an Americancompany in Pennsylvania. TopClass originated as a European project at University CollegeDublin, in Ireland, before becoming an Irish campus company and then migrating to theUnited States.

A number of important themes emerged during the analyses. These are especiallydiscussed in the following:

■ Penetration of Internet use and LMS systems■ Large-scale providers of online education■ Commercial LMS systems■ Regional preferences and market leaders



http://courses.telecampus.edu

■ Competitive issues■ Self-developed systems■ E-learning standards■ Course creation tools■ Student and tutor support tools■ Administrative systems■ Technology■ Economy issues

Interviews and Regional AnalysesThis article represents a meta-analysis of six regional analyses conducted within the frame-work of the European Web-edu project. The regional analyses are listed in Table 6 andpublished on the project web site(www.nettskolen.com/in_english/webedusite/index.html). They are also available inprinted English (Paulsen 2002) and Portuguese (Keegan et al 2002) versions.

Table 6. List of regional Web-edu analyses

Regions References to regional analyses Number of institutions

Northwestern Europe Keegan (2002) 18

The Nordic Countries Paulsen (2002) 20

Norwegian Universities and Colleges Runnestø and Ristesund (2002) 24

Germany Fritsch and Föllmer (2002) 17

Southern Europe Dias, Dias, and Pimenta (2002) 20

The Czech Republic and Slovakia Micincová (2002) 14

Total 113

All regional analyses are based on in-depth interviews with systems managers or systems expertsat the user institutions. The interviews were conducted in the fall of 2001 and spring of 2002 asface-to-face meetings, telephone interviews, or e-mail interviews. All interviews were based on acommon interview guide, and many of them are available at the project’s web site.

The researchers had no intentions of selecting interviewees that constituted a representa-tive selection of European system managers. Data is provided for Norway, which virtuallyincludes all the universities and colleges in that country, but it was not a goal of the projectthat every European country be included in the project or that every institution in a countrycould be covered. However, it is considered that the total of 113 institutions throughout 17

E U R O P E A N L M S E X P E R I E N C E S



European countries gives an adequate database for important findings on the satisfactionof European institutions with the LMS systems they have developed or purchased.

The researchers were encouraged to find interviewees in various types of institutions.However, in some countries and types of institutions, it proved hard work to find inter-viewees that were both competent and willing to take the necessary time to participate.

Table 7. Types of educational institutions

(The table is sorted by total number of institutions)

Table 7 lists the types of institutions in the study. A majority (67 out of 113) of the institutionsare universities and colleges of higher and further education. Other types of institutions aremore or less underrepresented. This reflects the willingness of systems managers in universi-ties and colleges to cooperate in the study.



Type of institution

Nor

thw

este

rnEu

rope

The

Nor

dic

Cou

ntrie

s

Sout

hern

Euro

pe

The

Cze

chRe

publ

ic a

ndSl

ovak

ia

Ger

man

y

Nor

weg

ian

Uni

vers

ities

and

Col

lege

s

Tota

l

Universities 4 8 10 8 7 1 38Colleges of higher andfurther education

7 2 20 29

Private companies 1 3 2 6 12Distance educationinstitutions

3 2 1 3 9

Nonprofit institutions(training)

6 1 1 8

Institutes of technology 5 5Primary and secondaryschools

3 3

University centers 1 1 2Training organizations 1 1 2Consortia 2 2Government trainingagencies

1 1

Commercial providers ofLMS-related services

1 1

Anonymous 1 1Total 18 20 20 14 17 24 113

Internet Penetration and Use of LMS SystemsTable 8 shows that 113 institutions in 17 European countries were interviewed. It alsogives the official languages, population, and Internet penetration in the countries. Thesefactors influence the selection and use of LMS systems. The data presented has beencompiled from various sources used in the regional analyses. The primary sources are CIAWorld Factbook 2002 and Eurostat 2002.

From this analysis we would like to emphasize the differences between the Internet usein northwestern and southeastern Europe. The Internet users range from 50% of the popula-tion in the Nordic countries to 33% in Northwestern Europe, 30% in Germany, 18% inSouthern Europe, and 10% in the Czech Republic.

Table 8. List of countries, official languages, inhabitants, and Internet penetration

(The table is sorted by Internet users per 100 inhabitants.)



Cou

ntry

Num

ber

ofin

stitu

tions

inte

rvie

wed

Lang

uage

Are

a in

squa

re k

m

Inha

bita

nts

inm

illio

ns

Inte

rnet

hos

tspe

r 10

0in

habi

tant

s.

Inte

rnet

use

rspe

r 10

0in

habi

tant

s.

Sweden 5 Swedish 449 964 8.9 7.0 56.4Norway 28 Norwegian 324 220 4.5 11.2 52.7Finland 4 Finnish 337 030 5.2 13.6 44.5Denmark 5 Danish 43 094 5.3 13 43.0Great Britain 6 English 227 480 57.6 33.5Northern Ireland 4 English 14 120 1.6 33.5Germany 17 German 357 021 82.2 2.3 29.6Ireland 8 English 70 280 3.8 2.3 27.5Italy 6 Italian 301 230 57.8 2.7 23.3France 4 French 547 030 59.5 1.7 16.9Switzerland 1 German 41 290 7.2 4.4 24.0Spain 1 Spanish 504 782 39.5 1.4 13.9Slovakia 4 Slovak 48 845 5.4 0.7 12.1Portugal 8 Portuguese 92 391 10.2 1.2 10.0Czech Republic 10 Czech 78 866 10.3 1.6 9.7Greece 1 Greek 131 940 10.6 1.0 9.5Iceland 1 IcelandicTotal of 17countries

113 Total of 14languages

There are significant regional differences within Europe with regard to how far the insti-tutions have come in their use of LMS systems. The differences seem to follow the regionalstatistics for Internet users, which means that southern Europe, the Czech Republic andSlovakia seem to be less developed with regard to use of LMS systems than the otherregions.

The analyses for northwestern Europe and the Nordic countries show that these regionsalready have come far in their use of LMS systems. The systems seem to be widely used inNordic higher, further, and continuing education. It is in fact not easy to find Nordic institu-tions without experiences with LMS systems. In the United Kingdom and Ireland there is avery extensive implementation of e-learning via LMS systems. This includes provision atdegree and diploma level. It seems that very many universities and colleges have pur-chased an LMS, and many corporations too.

The analyses for southern Europe indicate that this region is less developed. It is, how-ever, clear that the rising number of Internet users in southern Europe is expanding the e-learning market. There is a growing number of institutions with web presence and e-learning offerings, and the analyses show that southern European institutions are furtherdeveloping their existing e-learning offerings. The pilot projects are no longer dominatingthe e-learning field in southern Europe. However the research still shows that 50% of theinstitutions analyzed have less than 15 courses online.

The analyses for the Czech Republic and Slovakia also indicate that these countries areless developed. E-learning is not widespread in these countries, and public opinionconcerning online education is not always positive. Online education providers are oftenassociated with curious educational experiments. In most cases online education is used asan addition to traditional face-to-face education. However, there are some fully onlineexperiments. One institution would like to improve the LMS so that it could offer paidcourses as lifelong education to the public. Of the 14 institutions interviewed, nine hadused their LMS less than one year, but the results are nevertheless visible. Recently, a virtualuniversity collaboration was started by three Czech universities.



Large-scale Providers of Online EducationIt is interesting to distinguish between institutions that can be characterized as large-scaleproviders of e-learning and those in which provision is, as yet, on a smaller scale. Theanalysis shows that there is a clear trend towards large-scale online education in theNordic countries. It shows that 12 of the 20 institutions offer at least 50 online courses.According to a 1998-99 analysis (Paulsen, 2000), only 3 of 22 Nordic institutions sur-veyed offered more than 50 online courses three years earlier. Further, the interviewees talkabout LMS systems as large-scale systems capable of handling thousands of users.

A regional overview of large-scale providers, in which provision of 50 or more onlinecourses is considered to represent large-scale provision, is presented in Table 9. It showsthat 30 of the 89 institutions (34%) data is available from are large-scale providers. Thetable also shows that the trend towards large-scale online education has come further in theNordic countries (60%) than in the other regions.

Table 9. Regional list of institutions with more than 50 online courses

Regions References to regional Number of Percentageanalyses institutions that of large-

offer at least 50 scaleonline courses providers

The Nordic Countries Paulsen (2002) 12 out of 20 60

Germany Fritsch and Föllmer (2002) 7 out of 17 41

Northwestern Europe Keegan (2002) 6 out of 18 33

Southern Europe Dias, Dias, and Pimenta (2002) 5 out of 20 25

The Czech Republic Micincová (2002) 0 out of 14 0and Slovakia

Total 30 out of 89 34

(The table is sorted by percentage of large-scale providers)

Table 10 compares the number of online courses found in the Web-edu analysis with a pre-vious international analysis of Web-based education conducted in the Cisaer-project(Paulsen, 2000). This comparison indicates that there is a clear trend that institutions offermore online courses today than they did three years ago. One may say that the trend goesfrom small-scale to large-scale online education.



Table 10. Distribution of institutions per number of courses

E-learning StandardsE-learning standards intend to make LMS systems and learning content less proprietary. Theanalyses show that there is an interest in standards and standardizations that may make iteasier to exchange content and data between LMS systems and between LMS systems andother systems. Some of the interviewees spoke about the importance of standardization ingeneral terms. Many were concerned with the possibility of using, importing, and export-ing standardized course content and learning objects. Two German experts talked aboutthe importance of XML and metatagging. And many references were made to standardsspecifications and initiatives such as SCORM, IMS, AICC and IEEE.

All the institutions analyzed in northwestern Europe are sensitive to the SCORM and IMSstandards and they are considered almost as a norm. The Nordic interviewees are awareof the standards, and several claim to follow them. But few state that the standards areimportant to their institution, and e-learning standards do not seem to have had muchimpact on online education in the Nordic countries. The German analysis states that stan-dardization will play an important role in the future.

In southern Europe there seems to be considerable ambivalence with regard to e-learn-ing standards. Interviewees stressed the absence of both de facto and formal technicalstandards. One interviewee claimed that standardization would have a positive impact oninternationalization of e-learning businesses. Another argued that since courses often arecountry-specific, standards are not yet relevant. But standards are welcomed for marketingreasons, for cost reduction, and for LMS migration.



Num

ber

ofco

urse

s

The

Nor

dic

Cou

ntrie

s

Ger

man

y

Nor

thw

este

rnEu

rope

Sout

hern

Euro

pe

The

Cze

chRe

publ

ic a

ndSl

ovak

ia

Sum

Web

-edu

anal

yses

Cis

aer

anal

ysis

(Pau

lsen,

2000

)

% # % # % # % # % # % # % #

1 0 0 0 0 6 1 10 2 7 1 4 4 23 30

2–4 5 1 18 3 11 2 10 2 14 2 11 10 23 30

5–15 10 2 24 4 22 4 33 7 21 3 22 20 22 28

16–99 35 7 35 6 17 3 38 8 36 5 32 29 22 28

100– 40 8 24 4 22 4 0 0 0 0 18 16 3 4

NoAnswer

10 2 0 0 22 4 10 2 21 3 12 11 8 10

Total 100 20 101 17 100 18 101 21 99 14 99 90 101 130

Course Creation ToolsEven though many LMS systems provide internal course creation tools, the analyses showedthat a broad range of external tools is used to develop the content before it is published inthe LMS system. The interviews show that the LMS systems use text, multimedia, audio, html-pages, graphics, and tests that are developed with external software. The software tools forcourse creation referred to in the interviews are listed in Table 11.

Table 11. Software tools for course creation found in European analysis

Software tools Type of content URL

Word Text www.microsoft.com

PowerPoint Text www.microsoft.com

Authorware and Director Multimedia www.macromedia.com

Flash Multimedia www.macromedia.com

Windows Sound Recorder Audio www.microsoft.com

Wimba Audio www.wimba.com

FrontPage HTML-pages www.microsoft.com

DreamWeaver HTML-pages www.macromedia.com

Netscape Composer HTML-pages www.netscape.com

Viewlet Graphics (Screenshots) www.qarbon.com

Corel Graphics www.corel.com

PhotoShop Graphics www.adobe.com

PaintShop Graphics www.jasc.com

Autotest Tests

Webwinder Tests www.webwinder.com

Learner Interface Tests

Questionmark perception Tests www.questionmark.com

Hot potatoes Tests http://web.uvic.ca/hrd/hotpot

ToolBook Tests http://home.click2learn.com

Quia Tests www.quia.com

ReadyGo www.readygo.com



www.microsoft.com

www.microsoft.com

www.macromedia.com

www.macromedia.com

www.microsoft.com

www.wimba.com

www.microsoft.com

www.macromedia.com

www.netscape.com

www.qarbon.com

www.corel.com

www.adobe.com

www.jasc.com

www.webwinder.com

www.questionmark.com

http://web.uvic.ca/hrd/hotpot

http://home.click2learn.com

www.quia.com

www.readygo.com

The Nordic analyses show that LMS systems are usually not used for development of coursecontent. According to some southern European interviewees, LMS systems are mainly usedfor support and sharing of information. Other institutions need to use external tools andspecialist support for course production. In the majority of the German cases, there is nocourse creation with or inside either the commercial or the self-developed LMS systems.Finally, the analyses also indicate that there is a lack of available course content.

A few of the interviewees pointed out that they especially wanted more flexible solutionsbecause they felt too dependent on the systems’ intrinsic structure and design. One espe-cially wanted better control of graphical design, logos, etc. Another would have liked tohave access to the system’s source code.

Student and Tutor Support ToolsThere are a host of student and tutor support tools included in the LMS systems. However,the availability and quality of specific tools vary. Many interviewees were concerned aboutthe need for better and more advanced communication and collaboration tools. Two simplystated that they wanted better communication possibilities and secure communication.Others requested better support and more tools for teamwork and collaboration. In addi-tion, some especially focused on the need for better tools for synchronous communicationand immediate feedback.

The analyses indicate that several LMS systems should improve their test and assignmenttools. They could also be improved with regard to evaluation, e-portfolio, commenting onstudent presentations, knowledge management, assessment tools, and reports. The Germananalysis did not find one LMS system using an integrated examination procedure, and thenorthwestern European analysis found that the concept of quizzes and multiple-choicequestioning, a feature of most American LMS systems, is not considered adequate forEuropean academic evaluation.

The analyses in the Czech Republic and Slovakia pointed out that not all LMS systemshave tools to track student progress and monitor their performance. Existing tools are notgood enough. Student data are not available for tutors who have to contact the systemadministrator in order to get the data they need.

Administrative SystemsThe need for sophisticated administrative systems increases with the administrative work-load, and there is a general need for better administrative systems and tools. The analysesshow that many systems could have better tools for administration of students, tutors, andcontent. The interviewees asked for better group management tools, student record systems,improved course management, and better password management facilities. Some intervie-wees more specifically want better services for student tracking and reporting functions.

The southern European analysis revealed that the administration facilities seem muchmore important for professional training institutions that usually provide short, repeated



courses in several versions, than for universities. The university model, with year-longcourses, requires less frequent administration since it has a more stable associationbetween course, teacher, and student.

With the introduction of large-scale online education, the need for integration betweenLMS systems and other online education support systems is increasing. The analysesrevealed a general lack of such integration.

The Nordic analyses show that the LMS systems need to be integrated with a number ofother systems in organizations that aim at providing efficient, large-scale, online education.Integration between the LMS systems and the student management systems seems to berelatively poor, and the integration between the LMS systems and the accounting systemsseems to be very poor. In addition, several interviewees are concerned about the opportu-nities and challenges regarding integration with the administrative system that records stu-dent grades.

It is also interesting to see that the Nordic universities have standardized on a fewnational student management systems. The systems are LADOK (Sweden), MSTAS(Norway), FS (Norway), STADS (Denmark), INNA (Iceland) and to some extent Oodi(Finland). The high levels of national system coordination, or governmental coercion, inthese countries may possibly result in more collaboration among the universities and acompetitive advantage on the international market.

Some interesting integration efforts are in progress, but Runnestø and Ristesund (2002)confirmed that there is a general lack of integration between the LMS and the studentmanagement systems in Norway. Their analysis showed that some LMS systems have nopossibility for integration, others have the possibility to import data from the studentmanagement system, but only one system (SESAM, a self-developed system by NKIDistance Education) has full integration both ways.

The analyses of the northwestern European countries showed that data produced by theLMS systems are not yet generally integrated into the institutions’ administrative databases.Further, there are many German projects where university enrollment is the only prerequisitefor access to the LMS system. But this does not mean that the LMS is integrated with thenormal university enrollment procedures. On the contrary, in most cases they are completelyseparate. The German analyses also showed that record or test-databases are separatefrom the enrollment databases. Because of the privacy laws of data protection, it is noteasy to change these procedures.

TechnologyThe analyses found three categories of server solutions, and all seem to work well. In thefirst category, the institutions have access to commercial service providers that host the LMS.In the second category, the institutions host the LMS for internal use. And in the third cate-gory, the institutions host the LMS for internal use and as a service for other institutions. Theinstitutions that have access to service providers that host the LMS seem to be positive to thesolution, but they experience some problems with limited access. Several institutions have



chosen to host the LMS internally. They are typically either the institutions that have self-developed systems or larger institutions with high internal ICT competence that can operatecommercial LMS systems locally. The users of the commercial systems claim that the systemare stable and reliable. The users of self-developed systems also experience few problems.Virus attacks and firewalls, however, are mentioned as serious problems. A few institutionsthat have self-developed systems host the LMS for internal use and as a service for otherinstitutions.

The interviewees talk about LMS systems as large-scale systems capable of handlingthousands of users. The interviewees are confident that the systems can handle a largenumber of users without special technological problems. The interviewees did not seem tobe concerned with how the systems technically could organize the administration of largenumbers of students, courses, and tutors. One mentioned, though, that large-scale opera-tions could impose some pedagogical challenges.

Some comments point out that students have all kinds of connections to the Internet,ranging from low speed modems to broadband access. But the speed of the LMS systemdoes not seem to be any problem. The bottleneck seems to be the network bandwidth andlocal lines. To handle this, the institutions adapt their bandwidth requirements to the users’equipment. Due to the bandwidth limitations, several of the institutions limit their use of highbandwidth content. At the same time, many interviewees expressed a wish for higher band-width to be able to provide more multimedia content and services. Several intervieweeswanted to include video services such as streaming video, video-conferences, web-cam-eras, and moving pictures. Audio services such as voice communication and audio fileswere also requested. Some of the interviewees especially focused on multimedia tools suchas video-conferencing and voice chat for better synchronous communication.

Economic IssuesE-learning is not cheap, and cost-effectiveness becomes more important as the institutionsbecome large-scale providers of online education. Recent price rises, often quite consider-able, have made the commercial LMS systems a fairly costly investment. Yearly prices in therange € 20,000 to € 50,000 are being quoted. The cost and pricing structure for thecommercial systems vary from system to system. This could make it difficult to compare realcosts.

The staff time for the development and maintenance of self-developed systems is provingto be a costly investment too. The German analysis shows that installing a complete systemoften includes buying a new server and database software, which may easily amount tosome €100,000. But many respondents hide these costs behind the statement that it is self-developed, open source, or not available information.

Expenditure on LMS systems is only the first stage of spending. Hardware and softwareto run them is necessary too. The respondents list considerable sums for the staffing andmaintenance of the system, and others add that the provision of content is at least as muchagain. Expenditure on staff and student training is, however, much less onerous.



The interviewees have only vague knowledge of the maintenance and operation costs.Many interviewees mentioned that economic aspects are hard to identify. The issue is per-ceived as complex and hard to estimate. Further, it seems they have little knowledge of howmuch time and money that is spent on training staff and students to use the LMS systems.

Commercial and Self-developed LMSSystemsThe analysis of the interviews revealed as many as 52 different commercial and 35 self-developed LMS systems. It is however important to observe that only a few systems wereused by several institutions. This probably means that many system providers may have afragile economy. This is reflected in this statement:

The company […] has had economic ups and downs. If the company for somereason should discontinue its services, we will probably not develop the systemfurther. But we believe we can run our present […] installation for a long time with-out any support from [the provider], even though we hope that this situation willnever occur. [Anonymous]

It is important to understand that the statements presented in this article are just sampleopinions and they by no means aspire to be representative of the opinions of individualsystems. One might also suspect that some of the interviewees could be somewhat biasedsince they may have a vested interest in the chosen systems, having been involved in theselection process. However, altogether, the statements present an interesting overview ofexperiences with LMS systems used in Europe.

Commercial LMS SystemsAltogether, the 113 institutions had experiences with 52 different commercial systems.However, the analyses found only four European and four North American systems that fiveor more institutions had experiences with. So, the analyses indicate that these eight systemsare among the most used commercial LMS systems in Europe:

European systems■ Classfronter (16 institutions used it)■ TopClass (7 institutions used it)■ Luvit (5 institutions used it)■ Tutor2000 (5 institutions used it)



North American systems■ WebCT (20 institutions used it)■ BlackBoard (14 institutions used it)■ FirstClass (7 institutions used it)■ Lotus Learning Space (6 institutions used it)

There seems to be an overall satisfaction with the most used LMS systems. The analyses inNorthwestern Europe show a general satisfaction with WebCT as a user-friendly, compe-tent product. Blackboard has given general satisfaction, but is less widely marketed thanWebCT. The strong position of these two North American systems is not surprising, sincethey might be the two dominant systems on the international market:

Some higher education institutions continue to develop in-house systems or buyinto open source alternatives, but an ever-larger majority is purchasing licenses forproprietary platforms. Indeed, two vendors, Blackboard and WebCT currentlydominate the market, not only in their native North America, but internationally.Yet both have been trading for little more than five years. Market consolidation isalso underway. (Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2002)

FirstClass is a Canadian system that seems to have a strong position in Scandinavia, andLotus Learning Space is an IBM product that is also much used in Europe.

The analyses found that four European LMS systems seem to be significant competitorson the European market. TopClass may have a strong position in Europe since it originatedin Ireland, and it is praised for its student and records database. Classfronter is a Norwe-gian developed system that has a very dominant position in Norwegian universities andcolleges. The system is available in a number of languages and sold to institutions inseveral countries. In Norway, there is great confidence among the users of Classfronterwith regard to the service offered by the contractor. Luvit originated at the University of Lundin Sweden, before it became a Swedish commercial company with reasonable success inScandinavia and some other countries. Tutor2000 seems to be a successful LMS providerin the Czech Republic.

Table 12 lists the 52 commercial LMS systems identified in the study with their origin,URL and extent of usage.



Table 12. Alphabetical list of commercial LMS systems in the Web-edu analyses



Commercial LMS systems Originalnationality

URL of LMS Number of institutions using it as

primary LMS additional LMS an LMS

Ascot CourseMaster British www.ascot-systems.co.uk 1 0 1

Aspen American www.click2learn.com 1 1 2

Aulanet 0 1 1

BettyCOM Swedish 0 1 2

BlackBoard American www.blackboard.com 9 5 14

Centra American www.centra.com 1 0 1

Classfronter Norwegian www.fronter.com 16 0 16

Clix campus German http://campusonline.uni-freiburg.de:8181

1 0 1

COM-C Danish www.comc.dk 0 1 1

Corporate learning German www.global-learning.de 1 0 1

CourseKeeper Norwegian www.coursekeeper.com 2 0 2

Decus System 0 1 1

Destinations 0 1 1

DLS from ETS German www.click2q-online.com 1 0 1

Docent American www.docent.com 1 3 4

EDWIN Danish 0 1 1

FDL Learning Environment British http://le.reading-college.ac.uk

1 0 1

FirstClass Canadian www.firstclass.com 3 4 7

Fle3 Finnish http://fle3.uiah.fi/ 1 0 1

GLN – Global LearningNetwork

American http://cisco.netacad.net 1 0 1

Granada Learnwise British www.oakwise.oakland.ac.uk 1 0 1Imaker Norwegian www.imaker.no 0 1 1

Interwise-ecp German www.learnnetz-sh.de 1 0 1

Intralearn American www.intralearn.com 2 1 3

Intranets American www.intranets.com 1 1 2

IT Campus 1 0 1

It’s Learning Norwegian www.itsolutions.no 1 0 1

Kark Norwegian http://kark.uib.no 1 0 1

LC Profiler Finnish www.lcprof.com 1 0 1

Learning solution German 1 0 1

Learnlink evoeye American www.learnlink.com 1 0 1

LEKTOR Swedish 0 1 1

Lotus Learning Space American www.lotus.com 3 3 6

Luvit Swedish www.luvit.com 5 0 5

Nettutor 0 1 1

Ping Pong Swedish www.partitur.se 1 0 1

Plato 0 1 1

Proto 0 1 1

Response 1 1

Saba American www.saba.com 1 2 3

Simulnet 0 1 1

Skills Vantage 0 1 1

www.ascot-systems.co.uk

www.click2learn.com

www.blackboard.com

www.centra.com

www.fronter.com

http://campusonline.uni-freiburg.de:8181

www.comc.dk

www.global-learning.de

www.coursekeeper.com

www.click2q-online.com

www.docent.com

http://le.readingcollege.ac.uk

www.firstclass.com

http://fle3.uiah.fi/

http://cisco.netacad.net

www.oakwise.oakland.ac.uk

www.imaker.no

www.learnnetz-sh.de

www.intralearn.com

www.intranets.com

www.itsolutions.no

http://kark.uib.no

www.lcprof.com

www.learnlink.com

www.lotus.com

www.luvit.com

www.partitur.se

www.saba.com

Regional Preferences and MarketLeadersIn the countries that use English as the first language, the American LMS systems seem todominate. The overall impression is the domination of the scene by the major American-based LMS systems, notably WebCT, Blackboard and TopClass. This is likely because ofthe use of English in the United Kingdom and Ireland. WebCT has pushed hard to becomethe market leader with extensive promotion and presence at e-learning conferences.

In Australia, another English-speaking country, WebCT seems to be the most wide-spread LMS system and Blackboard seems to be the first runner-up. A NCODE-FLA(http://ncode.mq.edu.au) LMS survey (NCODE-FLA, 2002) of 34 Australian institutionsconducted by Sue McKnight shows 25 instances of WebCT, 12 instances of BlackBoard,and 7 instances of self-developed LMS systems. This is supported by a briefing on leadinglearning platforms (The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2002) which claims thatAustralia is the country with the highest penetration of BlackBoard and WebCT licenses inthe world since 76 percent of the country’s 34 universities have such licenses.

In countries that do not use English as the first language, the American LMS have manyuser institutions. The research indicates that the Norwegian Classfronter, and the NorthAmerican WebCT, FirstClass, and BlackBoard seem to be the most used LMS systems inthe Nordic countries. In the Czech Republic and Slovakia, five interviewees referred to theCzech TUTOR2000, three stated that they had self-developed systems, and the last sixapplied American commercial systems (BlackBoard, Click2learn, GLN, Intralearn, LearningSpace and WebCT).

However the analyses show that locally developed systems have a strong position in thecountries that do not use English as their first language. Nordic institutions seem to preferLMS systems developed in the Nordic countries. Among the 25 different LMS systems thatwere identified in the Nordic analysis, 16 were of Nordic origin. All other systems were ofAmerican, Canadian, or Irish origin. According to Runnestø and Ristesund (2002),



Commercial LMS systems Originalnationality

URL of LMS Number of institutions using it as

primary LMS additional LMS an LMS

Solstra Hybrid 0 1 1

TeamWave 1 1

TopClass Irish www.wbtsystems.com 5 2 7

Tutor2000 Czech www.kontis.cz 5 0 5

Verkkosalkku, Verkko-opisto

Finnish 0 1 1

Virtual-U Canadian www.vlei.com 0 1 1

Visit 1 0 1

WebCT Canadian www.webct.com 16 4 20

Weblearn Plus 0 1 1

West 0 1 1

www.wbtsystems.com

www.kontis.cz

www.vlei.com

www.webct.com

http://ncode.mq.edu.au

Classfronter is by far the market leader in Norwegian universities and colleges. Of thosethat offer online education, 65% used Classfronter. In the Czech Republic and Slovakia,institutions are converting to the national LMS vendors as these commercialize their prod-ucts, since their systems are provided in the national language. Language is an importantissue also in southern European countries and LMS systems that are not translated into theirnational languages are disadvantaged.

Competitive IssuesThere were some interesting findings which showed that customer loyalty, user-friendliness,cost-effectiveness, integration, openness, and adaptability could be of special interest toLMS providers that want to compete in the future market:

■ Institutions do not seem to be especially loyal to, or dependent on, one LMS provider.The majority of the institutions had changed system, planned to change system, oroperated additional systems.

■ LMS systems may have reached a point where user-friendliness, cost-effectiveness, andintegration with other systems are more important than new features.

■ The open source strategy may have an impact on the future LMS market.■ Adaptability and management facilities on the level above individual courses are requested.

It should also be noted that many systems could be improved with regard to linguisticissues, assessment tools, pricing, content creation and management. The southernEuropean analysis showed that the commercial systems can be very easy to start with, butthey may have problems with linguistic issues, as well as with assessment tools, suitabilityfor target groups, and pricing. Many systems seem to have problems with content creationand content management, student monitoring, and assessment tools. Online administrationand integration with other systems and platforms were also insufficient.

Much Used European CommercialSystemsThe analysis indicates that TopClass, Classfronter, Tutor2000, and Luvit are much used LMSsystems, at least in some regions of Europe. It seems that these systems may have a compet-itive advantage in their local markets since they often have a relatively good local represen-tation and support of local languages.

TopClassTopClass (www.wbtsystems.com) originated as a European Commission project at Univer-sity College Dublin, in Ireland, before becoming an Irish campus company and thenmigrating to the United States. In this analysis, the overall comments indicate that TopClassis moving from the higher education market to the corporate market:



www.wbtsystems.com

…Our contacts with the company were less than helpful. They are, unfortunately, moreinterested in corporate clients…. [Northwestern European Institute of technology #2]

We were quite satisfied with TopClass 3. It was a bit non-intuitive for develop-ers and there are bugs in the authoring system…TopClass 5 is too pricey and runson Oracle, which requires a very specialized expertise to configure and main-tain..… [Northwestern European institute of technology #1]

We have been very satisfied with TopClass. The graphic layout is somewhatold-fashioned, but it provides most of the functionality we need. [Danish distanceeducation center]

TopClass…needs some synchronous communication, including desktop confer-encing…At the moment TopClass seems to be predominantly made to bringtogether simple “text and gif”-type pages, which don’t take advantage of theunique ability of the Web to host highly rich media content and support all kindsof collaborative activity. [Northwestern European institute of technology #1]

ClassfronterClassfronter (www.fronter.com) is a Norwegian-developed system that has a very dominantposition in Norwegian universities and colleges. The system is available in a number of lan-guages and sold to institutions in several countries. An analysis conducted by Runnestø andRistesund (2002) showed that Classfronter by far is the most used LMS in Norwegian univer-sities and colleges. It further found that there was general satisfaction with Classfronter.

We tend to focus too much on technology. We need more focus on how we shouldorganize and structure online education. We also need more attention on pedagogicalissues and on training of online tutors. The content is much more important to us than theLMS. You may visualize the statement by saying that we must focus more on the textbooksthan on the bookshelves. [Norwegian educational company using Classfronter and Course-Keeper]

In their summary of 15 respondents using Classfronter, Runnestø and Ristesund state:

With no exception, all respondents express general satisfaction with Classfronter.Nine of them point out positive sides of the system. Five point out core criteria fortheir choice of LMS. Four respondents said that language considerations were asignificant contributor to the decision. Three respondents shared their views ofimprovement potentials for Classfronter. Twelve express desires for new functions.No one regretted the choice of LMS. [Runnestø and Ristesund 2002, page 147)

There is a large degree of confidence among the users of Classfronter withregard to the service offered by the contractor and the fast developing speed theprogram has had. The program has been updated with four new versions yearly,and many user requirements have been accommodated. The user reference groupfor Classfronter is unique in Norway. This group is the decisive reason why manyinstitutions have selected Classfronter. (Runnestø and Ristesund 2002, page 14)



www.fronter.com

Tutor2000Tutor2000 (www.kontis.cz) would seem to be a successful LMS provider in the CzechRepublic. Several of the interviewees express satisfaction with Tutor2000 and the fact that itsupports the Czech language:

The current system completely covers our requirements. Our main focus is on thecreation of the electronic courses. The management of the whole process is gov-erned by the LMS system. [Czech company]

Satisfactory. [Czech college]The faculty is just starting with the Tutor 2000 system. At the moment we use

the system as a support for the traditional direct form of education. We canalready say that, from the point of view of distance education, the system is com-pletely functional and perspectival. [Czech technical university department]

In connection with implementation of the LMS Tutor2000 we appreciated thatthe whole operation of the system is in the Czech language. Unfortunately wehave found some system shortages in comparison to the LearningSpace system wehave previously used. [Czech university]

However, other comments indicates that Tutor2000 had some significant weaknesses withregard to large-scale operation and commercial use:

For the current operation of the system in our education setup (approx. 100 stu-dents, 20 teachers) the system is usable. With higher numbers I predict someproblems. The system has quite satisfactory tools for the management of the edu-cation program; it is more problematical with the tools for course creation. Thereare a number of problems. The database administration would be very demand-ing and ineffective with a higher number of students. The system does not solvethe problem of the relations/connection between a student and an education insti-tution at all. The whole communication is just focused on the course. Communica-tion for example with the study department and the whole study agenda isled/solved in the IS Student program. The link between IS Student and LearningSpace is not automated. [Czech university department]

The Tutor2000 system is an LMS, which is mainly for administration agenda.Because of the fact that Tutor2000 cannot create courses, ToolBook II is used as acomponent part of delivery. In my view the system has some problems concerningsingle installations for customers. In our case some functions are not workingproperly (statistical evaluation/assessment). The system does not have an author-ized access function into the courses (they are opened in a new window and it ispossible to obtain the address of the course). The system does not have its ownmeans/tools for online communication. Considering all these facts I do not thinkthat this system in its present phase is appropriate for commercial use. [Slovakuniversity]



www.kontis.cz

LuvitLuvit (www.luvit.com) originated at the University of Lund in Sweden, before it became aSwedish commercial company with reasonable success in Scandinavia and some othercountries.

The Luvit tools have not been especially developed for corporations like ours. Theyhave been primarily developed for colleges and universities. However, Luvitmakes it possible for us to provide courses to all our employees at the same time.This immediateness exceeds everything we have experienced earlier. Many of ouremployees are parents that cannot leave their children at home because theyneed to attend a course. These people need flexible training, which we canprovide with Luvit. Luvit’s major weakness is that it is not compatible with Word,PowerPoint, and other e-learning platforms and products. An annoying detail isthat it is not possible to cut and paste material in Luvit. [Swedish company]

For us, it is important that Luvit is based on a Scandinavian pedagogicaltradition. We cannot apply German or American systems because they are basedon different pedagogical thinking. [Swedish company]

On the positive side, I think that an LMS system is absolutely necessary forteachers because they have to deal with a heavy workload. They work underincreasing time constraints, and in these circumstances Luvit can help them savetime and increase the quality of their teaching. [Swedish university]

I feel that the term LMS systems is misleading. The systems don’t really managelearning. They are more suited for organizing students and content than formanaging learning. [Swedish university]

The Swedish-developed LMS systems are not dominant in Swedish education.There is little national coordination in this field, the universities are veryautonomous and the system choices are made locally. [Swedish university]

Most of the distance education courses we provide via Luvit are included in thenational network university program (Nätuniversitet: www.netuniversity.se).Nätuniversitet allows the universities to apply their own online systems and models.In other words, the universities don’t need to coordinate their systems or pedagogi-cal models. This is probably good for the universities, but it could be confusing forstudents who want to follow courses from several universities. [Swedish university]

Much Used North American CommercialSystemsThe analysis indicates that the BlackBoard, WebCT, FirstClass, and Lotus Learning Spaceare among the most used LMS systems in Europe. This is not surprising since these systemsalso are among the dominating systems on the international market. The analysis indicatesthat there would seem to be general satisfaction with these systems.



www.luvit.com

www.netuniversity.se

BlackBoardIn 1997, graduate students at Cornell University developed CourseInfo. Blackboard.comnow owns CourseInfo, and changed the name of the product to BlackBoard (www.blackboard.com) with version 5.

From this analysis, there seems to be general satisfaction with BlackBoard. Oneinstitution, however, expressed regret that the system was not yet available in Italian:

The switch from COM-C to BlackBoard was partly due to a common e-learningstrategy among the institutions that recently merged to form the University of South-ern Denmark. It was also due to the fact that Blackboard is gaining market share inDenmark. The fact that we now have a system that we operate ourselves reducesthe external costs, since the universities employees handle the operation. As Iunderstand it, Blackboard is also easier to integrate with our student managementsystem STADS. However, integration is still a real challenge. [Danish university]

Blackboard makes advances in Denmark. [Danish consortium]Satisfied – plan to upgrade from Blackboard L1 to Blackboard Learning

System. [Northwestern European further education college]Blackboard was very simple and easy to use, would recommend it. [North-

western European institute of technology]Satisfied, we appreciate the ease of use. [Italian non-profit consortium]We are very satisfied and hope that the Italian version will come on the market

soon. [Italian university]

WebCTIn 1995, WebCT (www.webct.com) was developed by Murray Goldberg who was afaculty member at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. In 1999,Universal Learning Technologies, an American company in Pennsylvania, purchasedWebCT, and changed its company name to WebCT.

There seems to be general satisfaction with WebCT as a user-friendly, competentproduct. In a European perspective, it is interesting to observe that both a Portuguese andan Icelandic institution express a wish for better support of their national languages:

If I have to be critical, I feel that it might be hard to get the support we need forlocal adaptation from the American company. For example, we have not beenable to get an Icelandic language version of version 3. [Icelandic vocationalcollege with distance education department]

Good. There aren’t major difficulties in pedagogical terms. It responds accord-ing to needs. The software is equipped with many tools, but it isn’t adapted to thetarget public. The English language is another difficulty. The problem with person-alizing questionnaires makes interaction more complicated. The course manage-ment tools, as well as the specifics of the tutor, should be personalized. At the



www.blackboard.com

www.webct.com

level of support tools for training management, these are not duly developed, thusdon’t respond effectively to the existing needs, regarding quality and quantity ofthe existing indicators. The help could be more developed. [Portuguese non-profitassociation]

It fulfils our requirements. [Czech college]The system is applicable. It has its advantages as well as disadvantages, as

any other software. [Czech technical university]We have found WebCT ideally suited to our needs, efficient, and adaptable.

We have had very few problems. [Northwestern European university college]Excellent for us, although we recognize it is not perfect. [Northwestern Euro-

pean further education college]WebCT offers all the basic tools for teaching and learning on the Net. The

system is easy to use by the students, but demands a bit more work from teachers.The system should be user-friendlier from the point of view of a teacher (for exam-ple Quizzes are difficult to create and update). [Finnish university #1]

The platform works reasonably well and has been a moderately cost-effectivesolution. [Finnish university #2]

The most positive thing about WebCT is that it is easy to access it and to useit. You don’t need any special client software. WebCT works all the time and isvery stable. I’m very happy to use it. I haven’t seen anything I really dislike. Wewill probably continue to use WebCT in the future. [Icelandic vocational collegewith distance education department]

WebCT was a good choice for us. It is very comprehensive and therefore alsocomplex to master for inexperienced designers and tutors. The major advantage isthat it supports quality in teaching. Everything is documented so that the tutors canbuild on their previous work whenever they start a new course. WebCT has alsomade me think about education in new ways. For example the fact that severaltutors may collaborate and that a course could be designed by one tutor andtaught by another tutor. Online communication also facilitates collaborationbetween institutions and provides new pedagogical dimensions. [Swedishuniversity]

Global evaluation: satisfactory. Won’t change (the system) as long as there areno reasons to; it will only change for reasons such as cost or appearance of othermanagement solutions presented in new systems. People getting used to it is alsoa reason not to change. Negative references to the WebCT interface, there areno big differences between the systems. Its acquisition was decided uponconsideration of the costs. [Portuguese public university]

Well, we are still at the beginning and although we had some difficulties at thestart, there is no problem anymore and we are satisfied with it. [French university #1]



We are satisfied, we do not see any particular big problem that would not bepossible to solve. [French university #2]

We have found WebCT to be an excellent tool for implementing e-learningacross the institution. [Northern Irish university]

Very good, user-friendly so far. We are only in the initial stages ofimplementation. [Northwestern European institute of technology]

FirstClassFirstClass (www.firstclass.com) is a Canadian system that seems to have a strong positionin Scandinavia. To achieve full functionality, users need to install a FirstClass softwareclient. Some institutions perceive this as a disadvantage:

We are very satisfied with the systems we have developed. FC is a simple, flexi-ble, and well-working conferencing system with many features. It makes it easy toestablish and organize teaching. In my opinion, however, it is not an LMS system.FC provides a nice visual overview. The users may enter personal presentationswith pictures etc. They can also attach audio files. On the negative side, FC onlyworks 70% without installation of the client software. The client software makes FCfaster and better. So, we distribute the client software and recommend that the stu-dents install it. [Danish consortium]

The LMS systems are our primary tool for communication with our distance stu-dents. All courses except a very few completely rely on our LMS systems. We arevery dependent on the systems, so they must be simple and reliable in use.[Danish university center]

In my opinion, the three important LMS-functions are: publication, administra-tion, and collaboration. In addition, the system should be easy to use. [Norwe-gian semi-private provider of primary education]

Lotus Learning SpaceLotus Learning Space (www.lotus.com) is an IBM product that is also much used in Europe.The few overall comments on the system provided in this analysis indicate that the userinstitutions are satisfied with the system:

Satisfactory. [French university]Good. It’s a stable and intuitive program. The assessment aspect is not as well

constructed. [Portuguese non-profit private institution]



www.firstclass.com

www.lotus.com

Other European Commercial SystemsThe analysis revealed a number of other European commercial systems. The concludingremarks regarding overall evaluations of these systems are listed in the following. It is impor-tant to understand that these comments are just interesting sample opinions on individualsystems and that they by no means attempt to offer representative opinions on the individualsystems. The only conclusion, which is inferred from the statements about these systems, isthat there are a number of interesting, commercial, European LMS systems that receivepositive critique and may therefore have a future on the international market.

Ascot CourseMaster (www.ascot-systems.co.uk): One off system. [Northern Irish collegeof further and higher education]

Corporate Learning (www.global-learning.de): Decisive for this LMS was the clientcapability - several suppliers in this system, but still autarchic with respect to their clients.They use the general functions, but capsulated from the others. [German company]

CourseKeeper (www.coursekeeper.com): I recommend that one use standard systemswherever it is possible. Design the course content first, then choose the LMS. It would nothave been wise, if we had chosen LMS two years ago. Much has happened with thestandard systems during these two years. We have done much pioneer work, and therewere few institutions we could get any advice from. [Norwegian private secondary school]

Fle3 (http://fle3.uiah.fi/): What we are developing and using is rather different thanmost of the LMSs. We have thought that it is better to have a good tool for different tasksthan trying to have a Swiss army knife. [Finnish university]

Granada Learnwise (www.oakwise.oakland.ac.uk): Excellent. [Northwestern Europeanfurther education college]

LC Profiler (www.lcprof.com): As a user (teacher/tutor) I think that Profiler is good forlonger “academic style” studies for adult learners because of its pedagogical idea. (openand flexible learning/project phase learning”). Teachers must know (and accept) what isthe basic idea for the course structure and after that Profiler supports work very well. If oneuses Profiler very differently, there are some “unnecessary “ functions that may confuseusers. As it is offered as a service, starting a course is easy. As well as “building” a specialcourse for a system. [Finnish university]

Ping Pong (www.partitur.se): The Ping Pong Academic User Group, PAUG, is importantfor us. PAUG consists of 2-4 persons from each university in Sweden that uses Ping Pong ineducation. We have physical and virtual meetings several times a year. The aim is todevelop good new features in Ping Pong, and together buy these from Partitur. Anothergoal is to discuss questions about pedagogical aspects when using an LMS. PingPong’smajor strengths are the communicational and statistical features. Its weaknesses are relatedto limited student privileges. They cannot for example create their own web pages, estab-lish forums or submit files. Using a metaphor, one may say that PingPong provides moreopportunities for Ping than for Pong. [Swedish university]

Visit (www.visiteurosync.net): Our emphasis is on creating and providing courseware tocorporate and individual clients. We are not LMS specialists but do consider a solid and



www.ascot-systems.co.uk

www.global-learning.de


http://fle3.uiah.fi

www.oakwise.oakland.ac.uk

www.lcprof.com

www.partitur.se

www.visiteurosync.net

adaptable LMS as a key consideration in our corporate strategy. We find that our currentLMS suits all our needs at this point in time. The previous LMS we used was inherited fromLearn2 but we felt it didn’t suit all our needs. Our current LMS is actually a suite ofprograms including Software Simulator Technology , the Custom Curriculum Developmentsystem, and the Course Management System. We feel this gives us a broader and moreevolutionary system. [Northwestern European company]

Other Non-European, CommercialSystemsThe analysis also found a number of other non-European commercial systems. The conclud-ing remarks regarding overall evaluations of these systems are generally positive, so onemay infer that there are many reasonably good LMS systems to choose from. But again, itis important to understand that these comments are just interesting sample opinions onindividual systems and that they by no means attempt to offer representative opinions on theindividual systems. The comments are listed in the following:

Aspen (www.click2learn.com): LMS is well suited to internal education in a large com-pany where asynchronous and self-study methods are preferred. LMS integrates well onlineand with FTF courses with skills management requirements. [Czech company]

Docent (www.docent.com): We selected Docent after doing some benchmarking anddo not regret our choice. We would appreciate an Italian version of the handbook. Further-more the graphical impact of Docent is not very attractive when compared to our home-made one. I would say the interface is less intuitive. [Italian non-profit training organizationusing Greenteam and Docent]

GLN – Global Learning Network (http://cisco.netacad.net): The LMS is good, its inter-face for study as well as for administration is completely based on WWW, and it is world-wide and stable. [Czech technical university]

Intralearn (www.intralearn.com): The Intralearn platform is modern, constantly improvingaccording to requests from firms, educational centers and commercial users (clients, students).Through course creation the system allows acceptance also of older, earlier developedmaterials in different formats. There is no special courseware, which would cost a lot ofmoney, and also from the user’s point of view it is very practical. It is not limited by anyspecial requirements concerning hardware and software from final users. Administrationand management have not yet been completely tested in our conditions, but we can baseour conclusions on references of foreign firms (as well as universities), which use the system.[Slovak e-learning center].

It’s a program of good quality and flexible. Better than Learning Space and Formare, butworse than Docent or SABA. [Portuguese private company using Intralearn and Centra]

Intranets (www.intranets.com): Generally, this system meets our needs. It is simple,unfussy, and easy to learn. In the long run, we would like something more sophisticated,but we found when we were looking for a system that providers wanted to give us greaterfunctionality than we required and they wanted us to be champions within the university for



www.click2learn.com

www.intralearn.com

www.click2learn.com

http://cisco.netacad.net

www.intranets.com

fully integrated campus systems, rather than provide something that would allow us to geton with our job. [Northwestern European university]

Learnlink evoeye (www.learnlink.com): This system seems to be a perfect training system– the structure and functionality is only possible at the price mentioned, no hardwarespecialties on the part of the students; the cost structure heavily relies on – mostly – publiclyfunded student fees. Public labor administration gives most of the fees for re-training theworkforce. [German company]

Saba (www.saba.com): We use the LMS differently than traditional course providers.We use it more like a management tool than like a course platform in which the coursesare designed with the tools provided by the LMS. In addition, it is necessary to distinguishbetween the SABA system and our application of the system. Finally, it is important tounderstand how e-learning standards may influence your options and decisions. Thestandards provide both opportunities and restrictions. It is therefore important to find theright balance between standards and freedom. [Norwegian educational company]

European Self-developed SystemsIt is interesting to observe that the analyses revealed as many as 35 self-developed LMSsystems. They are all listed in Table 13. From this one may infer that there are remarkablymany European institutions that use self-developed LMS systems. It is however not alwayseasy to distinguish between commercial and self-developed LMS systems. Many systemshave started as self-developed systems that after a while have been commercialized. Otherself-developed systems are shared among several partners. So, some of the LMS systemslisted here as self-developed systems, could probably be included on the list of commercialsystems.

It is interesting to observe that most of the respondents expressed satisfaction with theirself-developed systems. One must however be aware that the respondents may have vestedinterests in their systems and that there might be many covert or vicarious reasons for choos-ing self-developed LMS systems. The German analysis stated that there is a tradition sayingthat a high-quality computing center does not need to buy programs developed by others.The need to buy external programs would question the center’s qualifications.

But the analyses also indicate that institutions with self-developed LMS systems perceivethe commercial systems as expensive and complex. The self-developed systems avoid lin-guistic problems and they are regarded as supportive of local needs and target groups.

Several Nordic institutions prefer self-developed systems. They perceive the commercialsystems as expensive and complex and want to develop systems to support their localneeds. They want cost-effective systems with the ability to handle continuous enrollment andintegration with student management systems and accounting systems.



www.learnlink.com

www.saba.com

Table 13. List of institutions with self-developed LMS systems

Name of institution Nationality Web address Self-developed LMS systems

Czech-Swiss Institute Czech

Danmarks Netskole Danish

CNED French

Netzentwurf German

TU Chemnitz German

Akademie German

Virtus German ILIAS

Akademie German Lernen-im-netz

Virtuelle Universität German Planetux

Osnabrueck German VC Prolog Tutor

LVU German VU

Darmstadt German Wave learn

Aristoteles University of Thessaloniki Greek

Instituto Formazione Operatori Italian Aula virtualAziendali

Anonymous Italian www.esperienze.net Experienze

Sinform1 Italian www.greenteam.it/greenteam/education Greenteam

University of Trento Italian Proprietary

Høgskolen i Narvik Norwegian

Høgskolen i Oslo Norwegian

Høgskolen i Sør-Trøndelag Norwegian

Høgskolen i Stord/Haugesund Norwegian

Handelshøgskolen BI Norwegian Apollon

Høgskolen i Vestfold Norwegian Ed-On-Web



www.esperienze.net

www.greenteam.it/greenteam/education

Norges Landbrukshøgskole Norwegian Kurs.nlh.no

Dronning Mauds Minne Norwegian MvForum

Globalskolen Norwegian PedIT

NKI Fjernundervisningen Norwegian SESAM

Associação Empresarial de Portugal Portuguese www.e-cursos.com e-cursos

Prodigio Portuguese Evolui

PT-Inovação Portuguese www.formare.pt Formare

Universidade Católica Portuguesa Portuguese www.mytwt.net TWT TeachingWeb Toolkit

AINova Slovak

LCDE Slovak

University of Vigo Spanish www.elearning.uvigo.es ELIAS

Statens skolor för vuxna Swedish SSVN2000

A Norwegian large-scale distance education institution using a self-developed LMSexpressed it this way:

SESAM has been developed by NKI to support the services that are important toNKI. We have based the work on evolutionary systems development over aperiod of 15 years. As a result, we have a system that is very well adapted to ourspecial needs. SESAM is excellent for handling continuous student enrollment 365days a year. The major, additional advantages we have over the commercialsystems, is the focus on cost-effectiveness and the integration with our criticalstudent management systems and accounting systems.

The southern European analysis found that self-developed systems might be simpler anddirectly adapted to the target groups; they avoid the linguistic problems of the commercialsystems and are constantly updated, being able to improve their features in accordancewith trainers, trainees and administration evolution. Besides the linguistic advantage,national marketing strategies together with competitive pricing contribute to the widespreaduse of those self-developed LMS systems.

Runnestø and Ristesund’s (2002, page 157) survey of Norwegian universities andcolleges concludes that all five respondents with self-developed LMS systems: “expressgeneral satisfaction” with their systems. Most of the other respondents also express satis-faction with their self-developed systems:



www.mytwt.net

www.e-cursos.com

www.formare.pt

www.elearning.uvigo.es

Very satisfied. [Greek university]Satisfaction. 15/20. [Portuguese company using EvoluiTech]

We like the product although it is “home-made”. [Italian non-profit trainingorganization using Greenteam (www.greenteam.it/greenteam/education)]

The system meets already, after our own development, our needs/expecta-tions. It is easy to use for teachers as well as for the students. [Czech independentinstitution]

At this moment the evaluation is very satisfactory, which is natural since it’s anupgrade that began in early 2002. From the perspective of the relationship withthe trainers it’s very friendly, they use it with extreme facility, they enter all kinds ofcontent, given that it’s not necessary to enter content in any specific format. In therelationship with the students, the platform is satisfying. We don’t use audio orvideo because the platform doesn’t respond to it due to the technological deficien-cies of the general technological network. In the administrative part we developeda set of outputs that we thought were necessary 2 months ago. In the relationshipwith the trainers we can possibly integrate some more facilities. [Portuguese pri-vate non-profit association using Aep e-cursos (www.e-cursos.com)]

Technically, it is a very good system. The experience is good in the Doctorateprogram and surpasses expectations. The most important thing is lacking; the insti-tution dedicates very little to virtual education. The only thing that the Universityacknowledges is the dedication of the teacher, counting it as a school yearactivity and thus valid for curricular reasons. [Spanish university using Elias(www.elearning.uvigo.es)]

Formare is a national system, developed according to the practice and experi-ence of e-learning. Perhaps that can be considered the secret of its user-friendli-ness and success in the increase of the number of clients in 2001 and 2002(currently there are 17 institutions). [Portuguese private company using Formare(www.formare.pt)]

-portal very successful among students and professors of the University; -veryhigh level of flexibility as to the choice of tools necessary due to proprietary plat-form; -well structured collaborative learning [Italian university]

The system is capable of offering courses to a smaller number of learners. Forits marketability, certain features must still be improved but it does satisfy the needsit has been developed for. [Slovak association]

There are remarkably many institutions that use self-developed LMS systems, and there maybe many reasons for choosing a self-developed system. Some of the reasons may be covertand vicarious reasons for choosing self-developed LMS-systems. But the analyses indicatethat these institutions perceive the commercial systems as expensive and complex. The self-developed systems surmount linguistic problems and are regarded as supportive of specialneeds and target groups. This is supported by some of the respondents who explain whythey prefer their self-developed systems to the commercial systems:



www.greenteam.it/greenteam/education

www.e-cursos.com

www.elearning.uvigo.es

www.formare.pt

We are developing our own because we were not satisfied with what’s availableon the market. A lot of people think I’m mad, maybe I am but I want to have ago. It looks like we will succeed. [Northwestern European governmental trainingcenter using TopClass]

SESAM has been developed by NKI to support the services that are importantto NKI. We have based the work on evolutionary systems development over aperiod of 15 years. As a result of this, we have a system that is very well adaptedto our special needs. SESAM is excellent for handling continuous student enroll-ment 365 days a year. The major, additional advantages we have over the stan-dard systems, is the focus on cost-effectiveness and the integration with all our criti-cal student management systems and accounting systems. [Norwegian distanceeducation institution using SESAM]

We focus on distance education, which is not necessarily the same as Web-based education. [Swedish public distance education]

We have an economic advantage since we can split LMS costs between threecollaborating partners. We are also able to offer more courses together, since wecan offer certified courses from all three institutions. The partnership is workingvery well. This is partly due to the contract between the partners and to thebinding economic model we have signed. It is important to decide whether theinstitution should buy a standard LMS system or develop an in-house system. Bothchoices will be expensive and include much work. I recommend that institutionscollaborate to share resources and expenses. I also recommend that one makes itsimple. Simple e-mail is often better than complex conferencing systems. I’m gladwe chose to develop an in-house LMS-system. The commercial systems wereexpensive and complex. Now, we may develop the system further to support ourspecial needs. [Danish consortium]

OK. Other than the limitations of the system, it’s obviously other factors thatlimit the use of the LMS in the teaching/learning context. At this moment we haveapproximately 10 disciplines from graduate degrees using LMS, at differentstages. In post-graduate degrees, we have 1 discipline with 2/3 years experi-ence, and another more recent... There is no institutional strategy, it is a bottom-upinitiative, but it would be useful if it were top-down... the initiative is facilitatedand accepted, but there is no strategic dimension... [Portuguese private universityusing TWT – Teaching Web Toolkit (www.mytwt.net)]

The system is being built and the benefit/advantage is that its single parts canbe used already at the present, which makes the work of involved/interestedteachers easier and more visible. [Slovak distance education institution]

Important FindingsThere are significant regional differences within Europe with regard to how far the institu-tions have come in their use of LMS systems. The differences seem to follow the regional



www.mytwt.net

statistics for Internet users, which means that southern Europe, the Czech Republic andSlovakia seem to be less developed with regard to use of LMS systems than the other regions.

The analyses show that there is a clear trend toward institutions offering more onlinecourses today than they did three years ago. One may say that the trend goes from small-scale experiments to large-scale operation of online education. If one characterizes institu-tions that offer at least 50 online courses as large-scale providers of online education, 30of the 89 institutions (34%) we have data from could be characterized as large-scaleproviders. The analyses indicate that the trend towards large-scale online education hascome further in the Nordic countries (60%) than in the other regions.

The analyses revealed as many as 52 different commercial and 35 self-developed LMSsystems. One striking conclusion is that there are a host of commercial and self-developedsystems that seem to work satisfactorily in various educational institutions throughout Europe.The systems are not able to handle all the functions the institutions want, and they could beimproved in many ways. But most systems encountered in the analyses seem to be goodenough for handling online education successfully. It is however important to observe thatonly a few systems were used by several institutions. This probably means that many systemproviders may have a fragile economy.

The analysis indicates that BlackBoard, WebCT, FirstClass, and Lotus Learning Spaceare among the most used LMS systems in Europe. This is not surprising since these NorthAmerican systems also are among the dominating systems on the international market. Theanalysis indicates that there would seem to be general satisfaction with these systems.

But the general position that the market is dominated by the American LMS systems isnot the norm throughout Europe. In the countries that do not use English as the first lan-guage, locally developed LMS systems have successfully ousted the American products.Remarkably, a large number of the LMS systems used in Europe are commercial systemsdeveloped locally or self-developed systems at the institutions. However, very few of thesesystems seem to have more than a few user institutions.

The analysis further indicates that TopClass, Classfronter, Tutor2000, and Luvit are muchused LMS systems, at least in some regions of Europe. It seems that these European systemsmay have a competitive advantage in their local markets since they often have relativelygood local representation and support of local languages.

The analysis revealed a number of other European commercial systems. The only conclu-sion, which is inferred from the statements about these systems, is that there are a numberof interesting, commercial, European LMS systems that receive positive critique and there-fore may have a future on the international market.

The analysis also found a number of other non-European commercial systems. The con-cluding remarks regarding overall evaluations of these systems are generally positive, soone may infer that there are many reasonably good LMS systems to choose from.

There are a remarkable number of European institutions that use self-developed LMSsystems, and there may be many covert and vicarious reasons for choosing self-developedLMS systems. But the analyses indicate that these institutions perceive the commercialsystems as complex and expensive with escalating licensing costs. The self-developed



systems avoid linguistic problems and are regarded as flexible and supportive of localneeds and target groups. One might also expect that a self-developed system is onereason for expertise to stay in-house.

The southern European analysis showed that in almost all cases, neither commercial norself-developed systems were able to provide all the services institutions needed. Administrativeaspects, integration with existing software and content management are some of the prob-lems encountered in most of the LMS systems. The analysis in the Czech Republic andSlovakia also showed that there were cases in which certain facilities were not available(e.g. synchronous communication). However, it must be taken into consideration that theinstitutions choose their system according to their needs. So, in spite of the fact that asystem seems to have a shortcoming, it is actually not the case, because the system issuitable and satisfactory for the institution.

With the introduction of large-scale online education, the need for integration betweenLMS systems and student management systems is increasing. The analyses revealed ageneral lack of such integration. It is however interesting to see that the Nordic universitieshave standardized a few national student management systems and that interesting inte-gration efforts are in progress.

Cost-effectiveness becomes more important as the institutions become large-scaleproviders of online education. The interviewees have, however, only a vague knowledgeof the system’s maintenance and operation costs. The cost and pricing structure for the com-mercial systems varies from system to system. This can make it difficult to compare realcosts. Some interviewees were concerned about high and increasing prices for the com-mercial LMS systems.

The analyses indicate that there is a need for increased focus on LMS knowledge,policy, and strategy in southern Europe. In particular university e-learning managers areconcerned with the university policy in this field. Apparently they think that southern Euro-pean universities are not dedicating enough importance and attention to this subject. Theanalyses further indicate that the introduction of LMS systems could be a source of conflictbetween administration and academia.

The analyses show that there is an interest for standards and standardization that couldmake it easier to exchange content and data between LMS systems and between LMSsystems and other systems. The institutions in northwestern Europe are sensitive to e-learningstandards and they are considered almost as a norm. The Nordic interviewees are awareof the standards, and several claim to follow them. But few state that the standards areimportant to their institution, and e-learning standards do not seem to have had muchimpact on online education in the Nordic countries. The German analysis states thatstandardization will play an important role in the future. In southern Europe there seems tobe considerable ambivalence with regard to e-learning standards.



Six Strategic Recommendations from the Web-edu ProjectIn conclusion, the web-edu analyses provided the recommendations presented in List 6 forEuropean politicians, educational administrators, and other decision-makers in the field ofonline educations.

List 6. Six strategic recommendations from the Web-edu project

1. Focus on improved integration of support systems for online education. Asonline education activities grow, it is important to reduce manual operationand to increase the quality and amount of online information and services. Thisrequires automated services and integration between the student managementsystem, the LMS system, and several other student support systems.

2. Require sustainability in online education. It should be of great concern thatmuch of the online education that has been offered so far has not been sustain-able. A lot of it has initially been supported by extraordinary internal or exter-nal funding and ended when the external funding has stopped. It is thereforeimportant to study programs that demonstrate sustainability and understandwhat incentives promote sustainability.

3. Increase focus on cost-effectiveness as online education develops from small-scale experiments to large-scale regular operation. The current developmenttowards large-scale operations entails that it is increasingly important to focuson cost-effectiveness on all levels. It is crucial to establish efficient and cost-effective infrastructures that support online education. This includes systems androutines for course development, customer relation management, course enroll-ment, student support, technical support, teacher training and support, exami-nations, payments, and logistics.

4. Realize that e-learning standards may have consequences for your online educa-tion and develop a strategy to deal with this situation. E-learning standardscould have a positive effect on cost-effectiveness and spreading of online edu-cation because they support interchangeability and reusability in e-learning. Onthe other hand, adherence to the standards may not be sensible use of limitedresources and their intrinsic pedagogical models are not necessary consistentwith an institution’s pedagogical philosophy.

5. Consider supporting the best local LMS providers. There are a host of Euro-pean LMS systems that seem to work well the way they are used. They areoften praised for local presence and supportiveness of European languagesand pedagogical traditions. But many of the companies behind the Europeansystems may have a fragile economy and face tough competition from theirNorth-American competitors.



ReferencesDias, A., Dias, P. & Pimenta, P. 2002. Learning Management Systems (LMS) used in South-ern Europe. In Paulsen et al. Web-Education Systems in Europe, Hagen: Zentrales Institut fürFernstudienforschung, FernUniversität, 29-57.

Fritsch, H. & Föllmer, H. 2002. The use of Learning Management Systems in Germany. InPaulsen et al. Web-Education Systems in Europe, Hagen: Zentrales Institut für Fernstudien-forschung, FernUniversität, 82-102.

Hall, B. 2003. New Technology Definitions,www.brandonhall.com/public/glossary/index.htm

Keegan, D. 2002. The use of Learning Management Systems in North Western Europe.In Paulsen et al. Web-Education Systems in Europe, Hagen: Zentrales Institut für Fernstudien-forschung, FernUniversität, 58-81.

Keegan, D. et al. 2002. Sistemas de Educação Online: Discussão de Termos. O Papeldos Sistemas de Gestão da Aprendizagem na Europa, Portugal: Inofor.

McKnight, S. 2002. NCODE-FLA LMS Survey, http://ncode.mq.edu.au/papers/lmsSurvey.doc

Micincová, M. 2002. The ABCs of e-learning, the use of Learning Management Systemsin the Czech Republic and Slovakia. In Paulsen et al. Web-Education Systems in Europe,Hagen: Zentrales Institut für Fernstudienforschung, FernUniversität, 121-157.

Observatory on Borderless Higher Education. 2002. Leading Learning Platforms:International Market Presence. Briefing no. 2, March 2002. www.obhe.ac.uk/products/briefings/pdfs/LearningPlatforms.pdf

Paulsen et al. 2002. Web-Education Systems in Europe, Hagen: Zentrales Institut fürFernstudienforschung, FernUniversität.

Paulsen, M. F. 2002. An Analysis of Online Education and Learning Management Systemsin the Nordic Countries. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5 (3),www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall53/paulsen53.html

Paulsen, M. F. 2002. Online Education Systems in Scandinavian and Australian Universi-ties: A Comparative Study. The International Review of Research in Open and DistanceLearning, 3 (2), www.irrodl.org/content/v3.2/paulsen.html

6. Support virtual mobility of online students in Europe. There is a steady growth ofinstitutions that offer online courses to students in other countries. This trend ismost conspicuous in Australia, North America, and the UK. There is a clear andpresent danger that Europe will lag behind these regions in the emerging globalonline education market. To improve its competitiveness, Europe should supportinitiatives that promote and facilitate virtual mobility of online students in Europe.



www.brandonhall.com/public/glossary/index.htm

http://ncode.mq.edu.au/papers/lmsSurvey.doc


www.obhe.ac.uk/products/briefings/pdfs/LearningPlatforms.pdf


www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall53/paulsen53.html

www.irrodl.org/content/v3.2/paulsen.html

Paulsen, M. F. 2000. Online Education. An International Analysis of Web-based Educationand Strategic Recommendations for Decision Makers, Oslo: NKI Forlaget,http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten/artikler/Online_Education.pdf

Runnestø, R. & Ristesund, G. 2002. Experiences with Learning Management Systems inNorwegian Universities and Colleges, www.nettskolen.com/forskning/Diploma%20project.pdf



http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten/artikler/Online_Education.pdf

www.nettskolen.com/forskning/Diploma%20project.pdf


Anecdote 5. Fronter: The Story Behind a DawningNorwegian LMS SuccessOn February 2, 2002, ComputerWorld Norge wrote that Fronter signed a large contractwith Beijing Normal University, and that the company’s ambition is to conquer the worldwith its LMS system. The article also stated that Morten Flate Paulsen rebuts that Fronter’sambitions are out of touch with reality. After this controversy in Computerworld, I havemade these personal observations on Fronter and its reality19:

Fronter (www.fronter.com) is a Norwegian software company that was established in1998 by Roger Larsen and Bjarne Hadland. They are still the major shareholders. Accord-ing to Niklas Indrevær, Fronter has 17 employees in Norway and works through partnercompanies in other countries. All in all, more than 50 people make their living from devel-oping, selling and implementing Fronter products. He further states that Fronter has createda flexible system that enables organizations of any size to administer users and courseswith ease. Fronter has customers with 5 users and with 65,000 users, all administeredthrough the same Web-based interface.

In August 2003, Fronter reported having sold more than 500,000 Classfronter licenses,about 50 percent of them in Norway. At the same time, Classfronter was available in 17languages including Arabic, Russian, and Chinese. The major customers outside Norwayare schools in Denmark and The Netherlands. The most important international users arethe city of Hague in The Netherlands, Fyn County and Dupont Agri in Denmark, theSwedish Rescue Services Agency, Chalmers University of Technology of Gothenburg, andthe IT University of Gothenburg in Sweden. According to Product Manager Ane Torvanger,Fronter is also launching a scaled-down LMS called MySchool for all schools in TheNetherlands through the company’s Dutch partners.

Classfronter is by far the most used LMS system in Norwegian universities and colleges.Initially, this was due to collaborative development with the University of Tromsø, whichmade the system well suited for use in Norwegian universities. In my opinion, the followingfactors have later contributed to Fronter’s dawning success:

■ Classfronter is a flexible and comprehensive LMS system with more than 50 optionaltools that are well suited to meet the needs of universities and schools. Some of themost important tools in Classfronter are Discussions, Shared Documents, Tests, White-board, Chat, Video, and Statistics.


19 The reader should be aware of the fact that on the one hand, I have worked with the developmentof SESAM, which could be viewed as a competing system. On the other hand, I’m on friendly termswith Fronter’s key employees.

www.fronter.com

■ Fronter chose an aggressive pricing policy to enter new markets and market segments.This made it possible to seize a leading position in selected market segments. The strat-egy was of course risky, from an economic point of view.

■ Fronter understood early the importance of integrating Classfronter with FS and MSTAS,the two major student management systems used in Norwegian higher education. Theirexpertise in integrating Classfronter with student management systems may give Frontera competitive advantage in some markets.

■ Classfronter is based on open standards such as Linux, MySQL, XML, and IMS. Thesystems development is based on extreme programming with minor but frequentupdates. A major new release of Classfronter is available every third month. Allreleases are readily available to all users, since they all access the same host computer.

■ The University of Oslo hosts all Fronter installations, and the university is perceived as acompetent and trustworthy partner in both the academic and commercial market.

■ Fronter has developed a close working relationship with Norwegian universities andcolleges. It has established and worked very seriously with a reference group consistingof 25 employees from Norwegian colleges and universities. The reference group meetthree times a year to discuss the further development of Classfronter. The advice fromthe reference group constitutes important guidelines for each new release of Classfron-ter. Similar reference groups have also been established in Sweden and Denmark.

My two major concerns about Fronter are related to yearly deficits and a possibility of“anarchistic implementation”. Teachers seem to appreciate that Classfronter provides alarge number of optional tools and supports a broad variety of file formats. The teachershave a lot of individual freedom and flexibility in how they teach and organize onlinecourses. However, from a system administrator and a school management point of view,there is a danger that the flexibility could evolve into “anarchy” that could be hard tomanage in a large-scale system with hundreds of courses and teachers. This could be areal organizational challenge for many managers, even though the software provides usefulfunctionality to facilitate overall administration.

Like many other European providers of LMS systems, Fronter’s economy should be of con-cern for customers. The company’s aggressive price policy has so far resulted in relatively lowrevenues and economic losses. But the company’s economic situation is improving. Accord-ing to Ane Torvanger, in 2001 Fronter roughly had revenue of € 1.0 million and a loss of € 0.6 million. In 2002 the revenue grew to about € 1.5 million and the loss lessened to € 0.15. The first six months of 2003 resulted in revenue of about € 1.25 million and for thefirst time a profit of about € 0.3 million. She also claims that the company has no debt.

I have followed Fronter closely after our controversy in ComputerWorld. I now regretclaiming that their ambitions to conquer the world are out of touch with reality. After all, weneed more online education companies in Scandinavia with international ambitions. I hopethey will succeed, and wish them good luck in the future.


GLOBAL E-LEARNING IN A NORDIC PERSPECTIVE

…the concept of online learning as a service industry may well be the most importantlesson that Nordic providers of online education could take from their Canadian counter-parts. (Page 332)

[Third Generation Distance Learning] was firmly rooted in a longstanding Danish traditionfor learning through ‘the living word’ (as opposed to the printed word). (Page 219)

The development of a collaborative learning program is much faster and many factors lessexpensive than the development of a CBT course. (Page 221)

The Achilles’ heel of Collaborative Learning is that it scales so badly. And the ability toscale in a controlled and manageable way is a substantial and timely requirement inDanish online learning right now...(Page 222)

… the very concept of systems which manage learning is something strange to Danisheducational thinking. Systems should be used to support learning. The management oflearning activities and learning players is best left with people. (Page 226)

Is your lecture today SCORM compliant, Professor? (Page 227)

…the universities will need seamless and powerful integration of their online learningenvironments and their student management systems. [We] will see two worlds collide inthis process: The world of the teaching staff and the world of the university administrations.(Page 226)


Part Three

Figure 11. American educational imperialism

In the US, online educators tend to perceive the Internet as their home market. In the Nordiccountries, educators regard it as an opportunity to study online courses from the UnitedStates. If these countries do not change their attitudes, they may soon experience adisturbing form of, American instructional imperialism. The Nordic countries are in severalways ahead of the US with regard to online education. Still, it is quite possible thatAmerican online tutors will dominate online education in the Nordic countries, just asAmerican textbooks already dominate Nordic higher education. (Page 18)



www.studymentor.com


The Nordic SceneThe five Nordic countries are Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. Sweden hasa little more than 8 million inhabitants, Denmark and Finland a little more than 5 each,Norway 4.5 million and Iceland about 300,000 inhabitants. Together they have a total popu-lation of about 23 million. Each country is among the wealthiest nations in the world. Thecountries are also recognized as advanced users of computers and telecommunication tech-nology. According to the key indicators presented in eEurope’s Benchmarking program(http://europa.eu.int/information_society/eeurope/benchmarking/index_en.htm), all fiveNordic countries are among the six EU countries that have the highest Internet access inhouseholds.

Sweden, Denmark, and Norway are often termed the Scandinavian countries. Manyforeigners perceive Scandinavia as a unit, as one single market. It makes sense, since thecountries have very similar languages, cultures, values, and political systems. In manyinternational issues and arenas the countries have collaborated closely. This shows thatthere could be many reasons for Scandinavians to collaborate in the emerging globalonline education market. One might also argue that it would be sensible to stimulateinitiatives to develop Scandinavia as a common online education market. Such a commonmarket could provide more opportunities, higher quality, and better cost-effectiveness. Itwould further help to preserve Scandinavian pedagogical values and traditions and protectthem from foreign online education imperialism.

Faith in Scandinavian online education collaboration was the foundation for the projectNordisk Netthøgskole from 1998-2001. The main project partners were NKI DistanceEducation in Norway, the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, and the Graphic ArtsInstitute of Denmark. The aim of the project was to establish online education collaborationacross the Scandinavian borders and to reveal barriers against such collaboration. But theproject had little success in establishing Scandinavian online education collaboration, andlike many other externally funded projects, it was discontinued when the funding ended.

However, the project revealed many barriers, and the final project report discussed thenine barriers to Scandinavian online education collaboration that are presented in List 7.


http://europa.eu.int/information_society/eeurope/benchmarking/index_en.htm

www.studymentor.com

List 7. Nine barriers to Scandinavian online education collaboration

1. There is a lack of funding to support Scandinavian online education projects.The project partners experienced that it seemed to be much easier to obtainfunding for European projects and for national projects than it was to get fund-ing for a Scandinavian project.

2. Governmental slowness and bureaucratic indecisiveness may make it difficultfor formal programs to compete in a global, online education market in whichtiming and development time may be crucial. One of the project partnersexperienced that it took two years to obtain a formal accreditation for anonline master’s program from the Ministry of Education.

3. Even though Scandinavians have a mutual understanding of the Norwegian,Danish, and Swedish languages; they strongly prefer to use their own lan-guage. This could make it difficult to offer online education across the borders.Ironically, it may be less controversial to offer collaborative Scandinaviancourses in English, since English textbooks are much used in Scandinavianhigher education.

4. There are cultural and pedagogical differences between the countries thatmake it harder to collaborate. Just to mention a few, Denmark has a tradition ofusing face-to-face weekend seminars and a preference for oral communicationand collaborative learning. Norway has a long history of supporting corre-spondence courses and distance education. Sweden does not allow collegesand universities to charge tuition fees from individual students.

5. There is ongoing harmonization of degrees, credits, and grades in Europe. Butthere is still a significant lack of educational harmonization even between theScandinavian countries, which makes collaboration difficult.

6. A strong incentive for collaboration is the prospect of additional income.Norwegians and Danes seem to be much more open-minded than Swedeswith regard to student fees for online education. Swedes expect that additionalincome should come from public funding. The incompatible financing structuresmake it hard to find financing models that support collaboration.

7. New educational programs need marketing, and there are few advertisingand marketing channels that cover the Scandinavian market. One may arguethat Scandinavia is three separate markets with regard to advertising.

8. Scandinavian collaboration could benefit from exemplary, formal agreementsand collaboration models that clearly demonstrate win-win situations. Suchexemplary models and agreements are scarce.

9. There is very little focus on online education as an export industry in theScandinavian countries. Very few institutions have ambitions to offer coursesabroad, not even across the Scandinavian borders.



In spite of all the barriers presented above, Scandinavian online educators have much incommon. They can also benefit from common resources in all Scandinavian languages.Therefore some useful web-sites are listed in Table 14, just before the list of Scandinavianonline education literature.

Table 14. Nordic Web-sites of interest to online educators

T H E N O R D I C S C E N E


Web site Web address Info inEnglish

Nor

way

NKI Nettskolen www.nettskolen.com Yes

NKI Distance Education www.nki.no Yes

Nettverksuniversitetet www.nvu.no Yes

BI Nettstudier www.nettstudier.bi.no

NKS www.nks.no

SOFF Sentralorganet for fleksibel læring i høgre utdanning www.soff.uit.no Yes

www.utdanning.no www.utdanning.no

ITU er det nasjonale forsknings- og kompetansenettverk for IT i utdanning. www.itu.no Yes

Tunet Møteplass for voksenopplæring på Internett www.tunet.net Yes

ADL Arbeidsgruppen for digitale læremidler www.uio.no/adl

Norgesuniversitetet www.norgesuniversitetet.no Yes

Swed

en

Nätuniversitetet www.netuniversity.se Yes

Nationellt centrum för flexibelt lärande www.cfl.se Yes

Högskoleverkets webbtjänst för studieinformation www.studera.nu Yes

SNH -Samverkan för nätbaserad högskoleutbildning www.mh.se/snh

SVERD Svenska Riksorganisationen för Distansutbildning www.sverd.org Yes

KK-stiftelsen www.kks.se Yes

Den

mar

k

Vidar www.vidar.dk Yes

Elektronisk Mødested for Undervisningsverdenen (EMU): E-læring www.emu.dk

Learning Lab Denmark www.lld.dk Yes

Center for Teknologistøttet Uddannelse (CTU) www.ctu.dk Yes

Foreningen for Fleksibel Uddannelse i Danmark (FLUID) www.fluid.dk Yes

Grundskole på nettet startet som et pilotprojekt under Undervisningsministeriet og UNI-C.

www.netskolen.dk

Danmarks Netskole www.netskole.dk

UNI•C eLearning www.uni-c.dk/produkter/elearning/index.html

Linqx www.linqx.dk

e-learning.dk www.e-learning.dk

IVU-C www.ivuc.dk Yes

AMU Centrene www.amu.dk Yes

Danmarks Elektroniske Forskningsbibliotek www.deff.dk Yes

Universiteternes efter- og videreuddannelse www.unev.dk

Finl

and SUVI www.avoinyliopisto.fi Yes

Finnish Virtual University www.fvu.fi Yes

eLearnIT www.e-learnit.fi Yes

www.nettskolen.com

www.nki.no

www.soff.uit.no

www.tunet.net

www.uio.no/adl

www.norgesuniversitetet.no


www.studera.nu

www.mh.se/snh

www.sverd.org

www.kks.se

www.vidar.dk

www.emu.dk

www.lld.dk

www.ctu.dk

www.fluid.dk

www.netskolen.dk

www.netskole.dk

www.uni-c.dk/produkter/elearning/index.html

www.linqx.dk

www.e-learning.dk

www.ivuc.dk

www.amu.dk

www.deff.dk

www.unev.dk

www.avoinyliopisto.fi

www.fvu.fi

www.e-learnit.fi

www.cfl.se

www.itu.no

www.nvu.no

www.nettstudier.bi.no

www.nks.no

www.utdanning.no

Scandinavian Online EducationLiteratureAlexandersen, J. med flere. 2001. Nettbasert læring i høgre utdanning – noen norskeerfaringer. SOFF. www.soff.uit.no/Nettlaering_bok/Forside.htm

Andresen, B. B. 2000. E-læring – en designhåndbok. CTU. Finnes via menyvalget”Udgivelser” på www.ctu.dk

Andresen, B. B. 2000. Det første år med det pædagogiske IT-kørekort. Evalueringsrapport.Århus: Undervisningsministeriet/UNI-C.

Andresen, B. B. 1999. Fleksibel læring for voksne – fra fjernundervisning til netbaseretteamlæring. Århus: Systime.

Bang, J. 1998. Videokonference som undervisningsmedium – mod det virtuelle klas-seværelse. I Videokonference i uddannelsessektoren — en tekstantologi. København: CTU.

Christofferson, N. 1998. Kostnadseffektiv didtansutbildning. Statens offentliga utredninger1998:83. Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet.

CTU (1999): Tæt på fjernundervisning – ni udbyderes erfaring med fjernundervisning ogpædagogik på pc-bruger-uddannelsen og PC-kørekort. ISBN: 87-90462-12-2.

Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L. (ed.), 1998. Det virtuelle læremiljø. VIRT-projektet, Erfaringer fra teknolo-gistøttede uddannelser vedAalborg Universitet (The virtuai learning environment).

Holmberg, C. 1998. På distans – Utbildning, undervisning och lärande. Statens offentligautredninger 1998:83. Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet.

Klitgaard, L. 2002. Nordiske portaler for uddannelse. Undersøgelse af eksisterende initiativermed relevans for arbeidet med Portal for Fleksibel Uddannelse (PFU) samt opsummering påbrugerinterviews. (www.iti.auc.dk/unev/docs/nordiske_portaler.pdf)

Krøgenes, K. L., E. Bentsen og S. G. Gabrielsen. 2003. E-læring - fra idé til virkelighet.Oslo: Damm. (www.nksforlaget.no/showArticle.asp?artID=3846)

Myringer, B. og E. Wigforss. 2002. Guide för nätbaserad distansutbildning vid universitetoch högskolor (www.netuniversity.se/download/192/x/Guide.pdf)

Nordkvelle, Y.; Haugsbakk, G.; og Fritze, Y. red. 2003. Dialog og nærhet. IKT og under-visning. Oslo: Høgskoleforlaget.

Nyberg, R. og T. Strandvall. 2000. Utbilda via Internet – Handbok i IT-pedagogik. LearnIT.www.e-learnit.fi

Paulsen, M. F. 2001. Nettbasert utdanning – erfaringer og visjoner. Oslo: NKI Forlaget.www.nkiforlaget.no/forlaget/html/utdrag/nettbasert.htm

SOFF 1998. En ekstern evaluering av et SOFF-støttet fjernundervisningsprosjekt. SOFFRapportserie, Nr. 2 1998.



www.soff.uit.no/Nettlaering_bok/Forside.htm

www.ctu.dk

www.iti.auc.dk/unev/docs/nordiske_portaler.pdf

www.nksforlaget.no/showArticle.asp?artID=3846

www.netuniversity.se/download/192/x/Guide.pdf

www.e-learnit.fi

www.nkiforlaget.no/forlaget/html/utdrag/nettbasert.htm

Online Education and LMS Systems in the NordicCountries

AbstractThis article20 presents the results from an analysis of online education and LMS systems thatare based on a literature review and in-depth interviews with 20 selected Nordic trainingmanagers in 2001. The analysis comprises a broad range of institutions from primary edu-cation, secondary education, higher education, distance education, and corporate training.

LMS systems seem to be widely used in Nordic education and there is a clear trendtowards large-scale online education. The 20 institutions had experience of 25 differentLMS systems and 12 of the institutions now have more than 50 online courses. Higher edu-cation institutions have standardized a few national student management systems, and theyprefer LMS-systems developed in the Nordic countries. Among the 25 different LMS systemsthat were identified in the analysis, 16 were of Nordic origin. All other systems were ofAmerican, Canadian, or Irish origin. The research indicates that Classfronter, WebCT, First-Class, and BlackBoard seem to be the most used LMS systems. E-learning standards do notseem to have had much impact on online education in the Nordic countries.

LMS systems may have reached a point where user-friendliness, cost-effectiveness, andintegration with other systems are more important than new features. Some intervieweeswant to integrate the LMS with existing systems and other services such as student manage-ment systems, marketing catalogues, online payment, tracking of textbook shipments,registration of examinations, and multimedia tools.

The institutions do not seem to be especially loyal to, or dependent on, one provider ofLMS systems. Several institutions prefer self-developed systems. They perceive the commer-cial systems as expensive and complex and want to develop the systems to support theirspecial needs. They wanted cost-effective systems with the ability to handle continuousenrollment and integration with student management systems and accounting systems. In thefuture, the open source strategy may have an impact on the LMS market.



20 This article is based on the article An Analysis of Online Education and Learning ManagementSystems in the Nordic Countries, which was published in the Online Journal of Distance LearningAdministration, Volume V, Number III, Fall 2002.

www.studymentor.com

http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall53/paulsen53.html

http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall53/paulsen53.html

IntroductionThis article presents the results from an analysis conducted in 2001 of online educationand LMS systems in the Nordic countries. The analysis is an integral part of the EuropeanWeb-edu project (www.nettskolen.com/in_english/webedusite/index.html) that providessimilar analyses from other regions in Europe. The Nordic analysis is based on literaturereview and in-depth, qualitative telephone and e-mail interviews with 20 selected Nordictraining managers who have comprehensive experience using LMS systems. The interviewswere conducted from October 2001 to May 2002 according to an interview guide devel-oped by the Web-edu project team. The interview guide identified the following focalpoints, which are discussed in this article:

■ The institutions and their LMS systems■ Course development tools■ Student support tools■ Tutor support tools■ Administrative systems■ Technology■ Economic issues■ Overall evaluation■ Features in future LMS systems

The following paragraphs present an overview of the situation regarding national initiativeson online universities, student management systems, and LMS systems in each of the fiveNordic countries.

DenmarkAccording to Ranebo (2001), the Danish Ministries of Education and Research initiated aDanish Virtual University in a mission statement on March 27, 2000. The DKr 40 millionbudget for the period 2000-2003 was to be used to support the development of high-quality, higher education, Web-based courses and provide information about the courses.As one of the interviewees pointed out, this was obviously not a success:

The universities have autonomous responsibility for their e-learning strategies. Anational initiative to establish a Danish Virtual University broke down as a result ofdisagreement between the partners involved. The only result seems to be aplanned portal providing information on e-learning initiatives.

STADS is the dominant student management system in Danish Universities and colleges. AllDanish universities except for the universities of Copenhagen and Aarhus use it. The systemwas developed by WM-Data in collaboration with the universities.

Scandinavia is an important market for FirstClass and some of its largest customers are




in Denmark. Skol-kom has more than 200,000 FirstClass users in Denmark. COM-C andBlackboard also seem to be important players in the Danish market according to twointerviewees:

Blackboard is making advances in Denmark.Blackboard seems to be growing in the Danish market. COM-C and FirstClass

are two alternative, major players.

FinlandAccording to Ranebo (2001), the 20 Finnish universities have formed the Finnish VirtualUniversity (www.virtuaaliyliopisto.fi) as a consortium:

The Virtual University of Finland is a development project that was initiated by theFinnish Ministry of Education during the year 2000. The project is a step in therealization of the overall strategies that the Ministry of Education presented in1999 in its Knowledge Strategy for Education and Research 2000-2004.

The aim is for a virtual university, which offers Web-based high standardcourses also at international level, to be set up by the year 2004. Through co-operation involving universities, colleges of higher education, research centersand private alternatives, the quality and flexibility of training will be reinforced,and research networks will also be reinforced.

The 20 universities in Finland will form the foundation of the activities and so,in January 2001, they established a consortium. Students who study on a full orpart-time basis at the virtual university must be officially accepted at a physical uni-versity if they want to get a degree. University students do not have to pay for theirstudies in accordance with Finnish legislation. However, the universities can alsosell courses and commission courses on the open market and thus provide courseswith tuition fees for the international market, for example. (Ranebo 2001)

Oodi seems to be the dominant student management system in Finnish universities. But itdoes not seem to have such a dominant position as the SMS systems in the other Nordiccountries. One interviewee states:

There are 21 universities in Finland and there are 11 different LMS systems. 8 ofthe 21 universities use the so-called “Oodi” SMS system, but only 5 of them haveOodi in real use. Oodi is based on Windows and Oracle (+Uniface +WebLogic). You can find more about Oodi at the following address, butunfortunately it’s available only in Finnish! www.oodi.fi.

The researcher later found an Oodi manual in English via a Google search athttp://atk.hkkk.fi/english/manuals/oodiohje_eng.htm

O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N A N D L M S S Y S T E M S I N T H E N O R D I C C O U N T R I E S


www.virtuaaliyliopisto.fi

www.oodi.fi

http://atk.hkkk.fi/english/manuals/oodiohje_eng.htm

IcelandAccording to Ranebo (2001), Iceland has not made any decision to establish a nationalvirtual university:

In Iceland, no overall decision has been taken by the state to assemble all thehigher education efforts in the area of distance learning under a national develop-ment programme for Virtual University or Web University. This particular area inhigher education is relatively broad in Iceland, and distance learning, as a devel-opment area, is a matter of top priority politically. Due to the size of Iceland, it isfairly easy to gain a fairly good insight into what is on offer nationally when itcomes to distance courses. This might be one reason why there has not been aneed to create a national comprehensive organization. (Ranebo 2001)

The Ministry of Education requires schools to apply a student management system namedINNA. One interviewee states:

Up till now, we have used a student management system named AXEL, which wasdeveloped in Iceland. Every school had individual installation of the same system.Now, the Ministry of Education requires that all schools use a central Web-basedsystem called INNA (www.inna.is). A company called SKYRR (www.skyrr.is) hasdeveloped INNA for the Ministry of Education. Neither AXEL, nor INNA has anyintegration with WebCT and I cannot see that WebCT will be integrated with INNAin the future either.

NorwayThere is no national online university in Norway, but a number of public initiatives thatsupport and fund online education in existing institutions.

In Norwegian higher education, the dominant LMS-system is the Norwegian-developedClassfronter (www.fronter.com). Some colleges use standard commercial systems, andsome institutions have developed their systems in-house. Runnestø and Ristesund (2002,36) surveyed 54 of Norway’s universities and colleges. Out of these, 32 institutionsclaimed that they offered online education. Several of them had used more than one systemas shown in Table 15.

Table 15. Instances of LMS systems in 54 Norwegian institutions of higher education

LMS Number of instances URL

Classfronter 21 www.fronter.com

In-house developed 9

Luvit 6 www.luvit.com



www.fronter.com

www.fronter.com

www.luvit.com






IT’s Learning 4 www.itsolutions.no

First Class 3 www.firstclass.com

Kark 3 http://kark.uib.no

WebCT 3 www.webct.com

BlackBoard 2 www.blackboard.com

TopClass 1 www.wbtsystems.com

Lotus Learning Space 1 www.lotus.com

TeamWave 1

Response 1

(Source: Runnestø and Ristesund, 2002)

In Norway, two student management systems totally dominate in higher education. TheNorwegian universities and some colleges use FS (Felles System) (www.fs.usit.uio.no) andmost of the Norwegian colleges use MSTAS (www.enet.no). The two largest privatecolleges have chosen alternative solutions. The Norwegian School of Management BI hasexperience of using Banner and NKI has developed an in-house system called STAS.

SwedenIn Sweden, no LMS-systems seem to be dominant, but a number of standard commercialsystems are used. Two of the comments made by the interviewees support this:

The Swedish-developed LMS systems are not dominant in Swedish education.There is little national coordination in this field, the universities are veryautonomous and the system choices are made locally.

Most of the distance education courses we provide via Luvit are included inthe national network university program, Nätuniversitet (www.netuniversity.se). Itallows the universities to apply their own online systems and models. In otherwords, the universities don’t need to coordinate their systems or pedagogicalmodels. This is probably good for the universities, but it could be confusing for stu-dents who want to follow courses from several universities.

According to personal e-mail communication with Fredrik Rexhammar (March 18, 2002),one of Sweden’s leading experts on LMS-systems, Luvit (www.luvit.com), Lecando, Infinity,Grade, Platon, and Web Academy are Swedish providers of LMS systems. In the samee-mail he states that WebCT and Blackboard are the most used foreign LMS systems at

www.itsolutions.no

www.firstclass.com

http://kark.uib.no

www.webct.com

www.blackboard.com

www.wbtsystems.com

www.lotus.com

www.fs.usit.uio.no

www.enet.no


www.luvit.com

Swedish universities and colleges. In addition, the author has found that the Swedish-developed system PingPong (www.partitur.se) is used by some institutions. An overview ofthe market for LMS systems conducted in Sweden is available at www.ssv.gov.se/avit/pform2.htm. It lists the following systems: Luvit, Mentor, Telia Instant Education, Maestro,FirstClass, Comenius online, Lecando, Librix, Marratech, PingPong, Surfa och lär, andWebCat.

The three Swedish distance education consortia have received considerable governmen-tal funding since 1993-94. (Hillefors et al, 22 and Ranebo 2001). At most, the three con-sortia provided 40-50 courses to 5,000-6,000 students (Hillefors et al, 26). After nearlyten years of operation, their results are not impressive and their funding will be discontin-ued. Instead, the government has recently established Nätuniversitetet(www.netuniversity.se) as a new national body to fund and coordinate activities. In 2002,Nätuniversitetet will provide financial funding for the equivalent of 2,350 full-time studentsat 30 Swedish higher education institutions.

All Swedish universities use the student management system LADOK or LADOK NOVAUowned by a consortium of 37 institutions in higher education in Sweden. The LADOKconsortium (www.ladok.umu.se) provides the following information at its web site:

LADOK is a computer based student admission and documentation system for auniversity or university college. It focuses on administration of undergraduate andgraduate students. The system is locally deployed and managed by the institu-tions…. The LADOK-system consists of two major parts: the admission system andthe documentation system. They are integrated and share data, e.g. name,address and other facts about applicants and students…. The system files containinformation for student identification, general eligibility for university studies, admis-sion to courses and study programs, registration on courses per semester, coursedata, credit points from courses, degrees awarded and international studies….Data from LADOK are exported to the Ministry of Education and other agenciesfor follow-up purposes. An important objective of LADOK is to prepare the annualinvoice to the government for studies at undergraduate level at an institution….(www.ladok.umu.se/opendok/LADOK_short.html)

Overview of the Institutions and theirLMS SystemsThe analysis comprises a broad range of institutions from primary education, secondaryeducation, higher education, distance education, and corporate training. But about half ofthe institutions are characterized as public universities. It includes public and private institu-tions as well as both providers of LMS services and customers of LMS services.

Table 16 shows that the analysis includes 20 institutions from all Nordic countries. Fiveof them are Danish, four Finnish, one Icelandic, five Norwegian, and five Swedish.



www.partitur.se

www.ssv.gov.se/avit/pform2.htm


www.ladok.umu

www.ladok.umu.se/opendok/LADOK_short.html


Table 16. Nordic institutions sorted by country



Nam

e of

Insti

tutio

nU

RL o

f Ins

titut

ion

Cou

ntry

Type

of I

nstit

utio

n

Dan

mar

ks N

etsk

ole

ww

w.n

etsk

ole.

dkD

enm

ark

Con

sorti

um o

f pub

lic te

chni

cal c

olle

ges

Cen

ter f

or F

jern

unde

rvisn

ing

ww

w.c

fu.d

kD

enm

ark

Dist

ance

edu

catio

n ce

nter

at b

usin

ess

colle

ge

The

Cen

tre fo

r the

Inte

rdisc

iplin

ary

Stud

y of

Lea

rnin

g, A

albo

rg U

nive

rsity

ww

w.v

cl.a

uc.d

k/de

faul

t-en

gelsk

.htm

Den

mar

kU

nive

rsity

cen

tre

Vent

ures

ww

w.v

entu

res.

dkD

enm

ark

Con

sorti

um

Uni

vers

ity o

f Sou

ther

n D

enm

ark

ww

w.s

du.d

k/in

dexE

.htm

lD

enm

ark

Publ

ic u

nive

rsity

Uni

vers

ity o

f Oul

uw

ww

.oul

u.fi/

engl

ish/

Finl

and

Publ

ic u

nive

rsity

Uni

vers

ity o

f Art

and

Des

ign

Hel

sinki

ww

w.u

iah.

fi/en

glis

h.sh

tml

Finl

and

Publ

ic u

nive

rsity

Uni

vers

ity o

f Kuo

pio

ww

w.u

ku.fi

/eng

lish

Finl

and

Publ

ic u

nive

rsity

Uni

vers

ity o

f Tam

pere

ww

w.ut

a.fi/

engl

ish/i

ndex

.htm

lFi

nlan

dPu

blic

uni

vers

ity

Com

preh

ensiv

e C

olle

ge in

Aku

reyr

iw

ww

.vm

a.is

Icel

and

Voca

tiona

l col

lege

with

a d

istan

ce e

duca

tion

depa

rtmen

t

The

Com

pete

nce

Net

wor

kw

ww

.nkn

.no

Nor

way

Com

mer

cial

pro

vide

r of L

MS-

rela

ted

serv

ices

Net

tskol

enw

ww

.net

tskol

en.n

oN

orw

ayC

omm

erci

al p

rovi

der o

f cou

rses

Net

tgym

nas

ww

w.n

ettg

ymna

s.no

Nor

way

Priv

ate

seco

ndar

y sc

hool

Glo

balsk

olen

ww

w.g

loba

lskol

en.n

oN

orw

aySe

mip

rivat

e pr

ovid

er o

f prim

ary

educ

atio

n fo

r chi

ldre

n ab

road

NKI

Fje

rnun

derv

isnin

gen

ww

w.n

ettsk

olen

.com

Nor

way

Priv

ate

dista

nce

educ

atio

n in

stitu

tion

Mid

thög

skol

anw

ww

.mh.

seSw

eden

Publ

ic u

nive

rsity

Stat

ens

skol

or fö

r vux

naw

ww

.nor

rk.s

sv.s

eSw

eden

Publ

ic d

istan

ce e

duca

tion

insti

tutio

n

Skan

dia

ww

w.s

kand

ia.c

omSw

eden

Glo

bal s

avin

gs c

ompa

ny

Uni

vers

ity o

f Upp

sala

ww

w.u

u.se

Swed

enPu

blic

uni

vers

ity

Uni

vers

ity o

f Lun

dw

ww

.lu.s

eSw

eden

Publ

ic u

nive

rsity

www.netskole.dk

www.cfu.dk

www.vcl.auc.dk/defaultengelsk.htm

www.ventures.dk

www.sdu.dk/indexE.html

www.oulu.fi/english/

www.uiah.fi/english.shtml

www.uku.fi/english

www.uta.fi/english/index.html

www.vma.is

www.nkn.no

www.nettskolen.no

www.nettgymnas.no

www.globalskolen.no

www.nettskolen.com

www.mh.se

www.norrk.ssv.se

www.skandia.com

www.uu.se

www.lu.se

Among the 25 identified LMS systems, 11 are listed as “other LMS”. This means that it isnot the primary LMS system used at the institution at the moment. It could be a system thathas been used in the past, a system that is being tested for future use, or just a secondarysystem used for special purposes. It is interesting to observe that Table 17 shows that 11 ofthe 20 institutions have utilized one or more “other systems”. This indicates that the institu-tions are not especially dependent on, or loyal to, their providers. This situation is both aresult of local autonomy and historical development.

Table 17 shows that there are large variations among the institutions with regard to thenumber of online courses, tutors, and students.

The number of online courses ranges from 850 [NKN] to 4 [Skandia]. The high numberof courses listed by NKN is explained by the fact that it includes courses from 50-60course providers. There are however eight institutions that claim to offer more than 100online courses.

The number of online tutors ranges from 10 or less [Nettgymnas and Globalskolen] tohundreds. Four institutions claim to have more than 100 online tutors. [NKN, NKI Fjern-undervisning, Midthögskolan, and Aalborg]

The number of online students ranges from a few hundred to several thousand. Eventhough the numbers regarding online courses, tutors, and students are not necessarily com-parable and reliable, one may conclude that most of the institutions offer online educationon a large scale. If one characterizes institutions that offer at least 50 online courses aslarge-scale providers of online educators, 12 of the 20 institutions are characterized aslarge-scale providers of online education. In a previous international analysis of Web-based education (Paulsen 2000) only 3 of the 22 Nordic institutions surveyed in1998–99 offered more than 50 online courses. The analysis indicates that there is a cleartrend towards large-scale online education in the Nordic countries.

Table 17 also shows that there are substantial variations in the number of years in useand course duration. The number of years in use ranges from less than one year to 15years [NKI Fjernundervisningen]. Eight institutions claim to have up to 2 years’ experience.Only six institutions have five or more years of experience.

The typical course duration seems to be several months. This is not surprising since mostof the institutions in the analysis are educational institutions that traditionally offer longereducational programs to students, not shorter courses to companies.



Table 17. Information about surveyed institutions sorted by LMS



Nam

e of

Insti

tutio

nPr

imar

y LM

SA

dditi

onal

LM

SN

umbe

r of

Onl

ine

Cou

rses

Num

ber

ofO

nlin

e Tu

tors

Num

ber

of O

nlin

eSt

uden

tsN

umbe

rof

Yea

rsin

Use

Typi

cal C

ours

e D

urat

ion

Uni

vers

ity o

f Sou

ther

n D

enm

ark

Blac

kBoa

rdBe

ttyC

om, E

DW

IN,

Firs

tCla

ss, C

OM

-C11

050

-60

240

in th

e de

partm

ent,

15,0

00 a

t the

uni

versi

ty7

Net

tskol

enC

lass

front

er,

Cou

rseK

eepe

r10

1515

0+15

02

2-3

mon

ths

Net

tgym

nas

Cou

rseK

eepe

r6

6<1

1 sc

hool

yea

rG

loba

lskol

enFi

rstC

lass

PedI

T &

Imak

er28

1018

0+15

01

1 sc

hool

yea

rC

entre

for I

nter

disc

iplin

ary

Stud

y of

Lear

ning

, Aal

borg

Uni

vers

ityFi

rstC

lass

Virtu

al-U

11

prog

ram

s12

088

08

1 se

mes

ter

Vent

ures

Firs

tCla

ssN

one

A n

umbe

r of

prog

ram

s50

3,00

05

Typi

cally

one

sem

este

r,al

so in

divi

dual

enr

ollm

ent

Uni

vers

ity o

f Art

and

Des

ign

Hel

sinki

Fle3

- Le

arni

ngEn

viro

nmen

tW

ebC

T20

44-

16 w

eeks

Uni

vers

ity o

f Oul

uLC

Pro

filer

41??

?2,

500

user

sSe

vera

l wee

ks o

r mon

ths

Skan

dia

Luvi

tN

one

4??

?65

02

6 m

onth

sU

nive

rsity

of L

und

Luvi

tLo

tus

Lear

ning

Spa

ce25

06,

000

of 2

3,00

0 stu

-de

nts

are

Luvi

t use

rs5

Uni

vers

ity o

f Upp

sala

Ping

Pon

gFi

rstC

lass

5050

20,0

00 a

ccou

nts,

2,00

0 re

al u

sers

1.5

0.25

-0.5

sch

ool y

ear

NKN

Saba

Web

Lear

n Pl

us85

0hu

ndre

ds1

3 ho

urs

– 6

mon

ths

Dan

mar

ks N

etsk

ole

Self-d

evel

oped

4030

7,00

0 en

rollm

ents

<116

wee

ksN

KI F

jern

unde

rvisn

inge

nSE

SAM

(S

elf-d

evel

oped

)25

012

53,

300

156

mon

ths

SSVN

SSVN

2000

(S

elf-d

evel

oped

)LE

KTO

R50

20-2

550

0-1,

000

1Fe

w w

eeks

– s

ever

alye

ars

CFU

TopC

lass

Blac

kBoa

rd20

Equi

vale

nt o

f 4fu

ll-tim

e po

sitio

ns50

04

1-4

mon

ths

Mid

thög

skol

anW

ebC

TFi

rstC

lass

, Wes

t20

0Be

twee

n 10

0an

d 20

02-

3,00

0. 4

0% a

t a d

is-ta

nce,

60%

on

cam

pus

50.

5 –

4 se

mes

ters

Uni

vers

ity o

f Kuo

pio

Web

CT

Verk

kosa

lkku,

Ver

kko-

opist

o20

04,

500

340

-160

hou

rsU

nive

rsity

of T

ampe

reW

ebC

T14

03,

700

3C

ompr

ehen

sive

Col

lege

in A

ukur

eyri

Web

CT

Non

e18

0 co

urse

s,10

-20

appl

yW

ebC

T

9575

04

1 se

mes

ter

Table 18 shows that the 20 institutions had utilized 25 different LMS systems. It is interest-ing to observe that the majority (16 of 25) of the LMS systems are of Nordic origin. Allother systems were of American, Canadian, or Irish origin.

The analysis further shows that 3 institutions (Danmarks Nettskole, NKI Fjernundervisning,and SSVN) have chosen to use self-developed LMS systems. One additional institution(Globalskolen) states that it will convert to a self-developed system.

The commercial LMS systems that are most widely used among the institutions in thisanalysis are FirstClass and WebCT. The strong position of WebCT is not surprising, sinceWebCT and BlackBoard presently are the two dominant LMS systems on the internationalmarket (Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2002). FirstClass’ European head-quarters is located in Sweden. Scandinavia is an important market for FirstClass and someof its largest customers are in Denmark. Skol-kom has more than 200,000 FirstClass usersin Denmark. It is also important to know that a comprehensive analysis (Runnestø andRistesund, 2002) shows that the Norwegian system Classfronter is very dominant inNorwegian higher education.

The commercial LMS systems are available in several languages, but Nordic institutionsprefer to use their national languages. This is a special problem for Iceland, since fewproviders find it interesting to develop a version for the Icelandic population of less than300,000 inhabitants. There are also examples of Nordic Institutions that choose to use theEnglish language version, since new versions are first released in English.

Two of the LMS systems in this analysis, Virtual-U and Fle3, are referred to as opensource systems. The interviewees who point this out are very positive to this, and it will beinteresting to see if the open source strategy will be able to compete with the other commer-cial systems.



Table 18. LMS systems sorted by original nationality



LMS

syste

ms

Orig

inal

Nat

iona

lity

Lang

uage

of L

MS

URL

of L

MS

Insti

tutio

ns u

sing

LMS

Insti

tutio

ns u

sing

Oth

er LM

S

Web

lear

n Plu

sEn

glish

NKN

Wes

t M

idth

ögsk

olan

Blac

kBoa

rdAm

eric

anEn

glish

, Dan

ishw

ww.

blac

kboa

rd.c

omSo

uthe

rn D

enm

ark

CFU

Lotu

s Le

arni

ng S

pace

Amer

ican

ww

w.lo

tus.c

omLu

nd

Saba

Amer

ican

Engl

ish, N

orw

egia

nw

ww.

saba

.com

NKN

FirstC

lass

Can

adia

nN

orw

egia

n, D

anish

, Oth

ers

ww

w.fir

stcla

ss.c

omG

loba

lskol

en, V

entu

res,

Aal

borg

Mid

thög

skol

an, S

outh

ern

Denm

ark,

Upps

ala

Virtu

al-U

Can

adia

nw

ww.

vlei.c

omAa

lbor

g

Web

CT

Can

adia

nEn

glish

, Sw

edish

, Not

ava

ilabl

e in

Icel

andi

cw

ww.

web

ct.c

omM

idth

ögsk

olan

, Kuo

pio,

Tam

pere

,Ak

urey

riUI

AH

Betty

CO

MDa

nish

Sout

hern

Den

mar

k

CO

M-C

Dani

shSo

uthe

rn D

enm

ark

EDW

INDa

nish

Sout

hern

Den

mar

k

Self-d

evel

oped

Dani

shDa

nish

Danm

arks

Net

skol

e

Fle3

Finni

shFin

nish

, Sw

edish

, Eng

lish,

Spa

nish

, Fre

nch

http

://f

le3.

uiah

.fi/

UIAH

LC P

rofile

rFin

nish

Finni

sh, E

nglis

hw

ww.

lcpro

f.com

Unive

rsity

of O

ulu

Verk

kosa

lkku,

Ver

kko-

opist

oFin

nish

Kuop

io

TopC

lass

Irish

Engl

ish, D

anish

ww

w.w

btsy

stem

s.com

CFU

Cla

ssfro

nter

Nor

weg

ian

Nor

weg

ian,

Eng

lish

ww

w.fro

nter

.com

Net

tskol

en

Cou

rseKe

eper

N

orw

egia

nN

orw

egia

n, E

nglis

hw

ww.

cour

seke

eper

.com

Net

tskol

en, N

ettg

ymna

s

Imak

er

Nor

weg

ian

ww

w.im

aker

.no

Glo

balsk

olen

Self-d

evel

oped

: Ped

ITN

orw

egia

nN

orw

egia

nG

loba

lskol

en

Self-d

evel

oped

: SES

AMN

orw

egia

nN

orw

egia

nN

KI F

jern

unde

rvisn

inge

n

LEKT

OR

Swed

ishSw

edish

SSVN

Luvit

Swed

ishEn

glish

, Ger

man

, Fre

nch,

Chi

nese

, Sw

edish

,Da

nish

, Nor

weg

ian

ww

w.lu

vit.c

omSk

andi

a, Lu

nd

Ping

Pon

gSw

edish

Swed

ish, E

nglis

h, G

erm

an, F

renc

hw

ww.

parti

tur.s

eUp

psal

a

Self-d

evel

oped

: SSV

N20

00Sw

edish

Swed

ishSS

VN

www.blackboard.com

www.lotus.com

www.saba.com

www.firstclass.com

www.vlei.com

www.webct.com

http://fle3.uiah.fi/

www.lcprof.com

www.wbtsystems.com

www.fronter.com


www.imaker.no

www.luvit.com

www.partitur.se

Course Creation ToolsThe interviewees have different views on how satisfactory the systems are for course cre-ation. However the LMS systems are usually not used for development of course content.A broad range of external tools is used to develop content before it is published in the LMSsystem. A number of such tools are listed at the Higher Education and New Technologiesweb site in Switzerland (www.edutech.ch/edutech/tools/tools_e.asp). The interviewsshow that the LMS systems use text, multimedia, sound, html-pages, graphics, and tests thatare developed with external software. The software tools for course creation referred to inthe interviews are listed in Table 19.

Table 19. Software tools for course creation found in Nordic analysis

Software tool Type of content URL

Word Text www.microsoft.com

PowerPoint Text www.microsoft.com

Authorware and Director Multimedia www.macromedia.com

Flash Multimedia www.macromedia.com

Windows Sound Recorder Audio www.microsoft.com

Wimba Audio www.wimba.com

FrontPage HTML-pages www.microsoft.com

DreamWeaver HTML-pages www.macromedia.com

Netscape Composer HTML-pages www.netscape.com

Viewlet Graphics (Screenshots) www.qarbon.com

Corel Graphics www.corel.com

PhotoShop Graphics www.adobe.com

ReadyGo www.readygo.com

ToolBook http://home.click2learn.com

Autotest Tests

Webwinder Tests www.webwinder.com

Development of course content is not trivial, and teachers rarely develop course contentwithout support from others. They seem to use content developed by others, collaborate, or



www.edutech.ch/edutech/tools/tools_e.asp

www.microsoft.com

www.microsoft.com

www.macromedia.com

www.macromedia.com

www.microsoft.com

www.wimba.com

www.microsoft.com

www.macromedia.com

www.netscape.com

www.qarbon.com

www.corel.com

www.adobe.com

www.readygo.com

http://home.click2learn.com

www.webwinder.com

work in teams. Some teachers participate in development courses, have support by web-designers, or support staff.

Reusability and sharing of content may be useful. Export features, archive functions, andstandards might make this easier. Several comments indicate that the systems are perceivedas flexible and open to differing didactic possibilities. But a few comments indicate thatsome systems could be perceived as inflexible with regard to didactic possibilities. To makecourse development easier or to increase productivity, some institutions provide or requirethat the content must adhere to special structures or templates. However, institutions that donot use the commercial systems maintain that their systems are especially designed andused to support their chosen didactics.

In some cases, individual teachers design the content. In other cases, the teachers donot develop course content themselves. However, it seems to be common that teacherscollaborate or work together with other specialists to develop course content. Some claimthat their system is easy to use by teachers and course developers. But obviously somesupport and training for teachers is useful. This could include contact with experiencedtutors, teacher training, dedicated discussion forums, and support services.

Generally the interviewees confirm that the LMS systems support a wide range of mediatypes. Most institutions seem to utilize some multimedia. However, several interviewees arecautious about too much use of multimedia due to bandwidth limitations or lack of develop-ment tools. And other institutions seem to be even more cautious about including onlinevideo.

Assignment and assessment is a complex topic that should be applied in a pedagogicalframework. The most frequently mentioned type of online test is multiple-choice questions.Among the other types of assignment and assessment mentioned are interactive assign-ments, quizzes, portfolio assessment, and surveys. Some of the interviewees are skepticalabout computer-based assessment since it does not correspond to their pedagogical modelor teaching tradition. Some of the systems have no built-in tools for assignments or assess-ment. However, there are external tools that could be used to design assignments. The inter-viewees especially mentioned Autotest and Webwinder. WebCT seems to provide a rangeof useful tools. Luvit, PingPong, Saba, and SSVN2000 also seem to provide useful tools forassignment and assessment.

Student Support ToolsThere are user groups, such as sales people that work together in one company, that donot ask for online communication. However, the LMS systems seem to provide a lot ofopportunities for student interaction through e-mail, distribution lists, discussion forums, chat-ting, bulletin boards, whiteboards etc. Discussion forums seem to be the most important toolfor group communication. The institutions often organize a number of forums for varioususer groups and purposes. However, use of e-mail is also important, especially for institu-tions with individual course progression. Chatting requires discipline and could beimproved technically, but it has several interesting applications such as to reduce costs



related to international communication. Among the other features that were mentioned forimproving student interaction were tracking, integrated FAQ-services, personal presenta-tions, pictures, and class lists. Finally, some comments reflected on students’ opportunities tointeract with the course material, the environment, and other students.

Many, but not all LMS systems, offer tools for both synchronous and asynchronous com-munication. Some institutions add external communication tools to offer additional commu-nication services such as chatting, audio chatting, audio conferencing, and sharing ofdocuments. Asynchronous communication via discussion forums and e-mail seem to be thepreferred services for student-to-student communication. Several of the systems seem toprovide some form of chatting as a tool for synchronous communication. Experiences withchatting are varying. It may be useful for social purposes and for informal communication insmaller groups. But several institutions limit the use of chatting since it is inflexible in time.Chatting may however be useful for formal project meetings.

Technical and administrative support is a challenge that requires varying resources. Boththe numbers of support staff and support hours differ. Support is not available 24 hours aday, but some institutions offer support after normal office hours. Communication with tutorsis handled both via e-mail and discussion forums. One institution claims that it guaranteesstudents a response from tutors in less than 48 hours.

In general, the systems seem to have limited use of library resources. The most commonservices are links to existing internal and external Internet resources. Some institutionsprovide special services such as online journals, articles, library services, and bookshopsfor their online students.

Some comments indicate that the LMS systems need improved functionality with regardto feedback on work assignments. And tutors seem to be pivotal with regard to feedbackon work and assignments. It is interesting to observe that some systems provide specialmailboxes for submission of assignments, opportunities for online registration and presenta-tion of grades, and real-time accounts for individual teacher remuneration.

Tutor Support ToolsSome institutions do not express a need for automatic tracking of student progressionsince their performance is measured by tutors or work competence. Tracking of studentsmay, however, be useful for administrators, tutors, and students. However one should beaware that some students are apprehensive about being monitored. Most systems seemto have some tracking of what students have done and when they did it. This mayinclude which assignments they have completed, which web pages they have opened,and which tests they have taken. WebCT seems to provide tracking services that theusers are satisfied with. They include tracking of quiz scores, log-ins, pages accessed,and comments written. A few interviewees focus on the systems’ ability to provideadvanced administrative reports on enrollments, course activity etc. The self-developedSSVN2000 tracking system is especially interesting since it provides excellent tracking ofstudents with individual progress plans.



Group management includes tasks such as entering information about students, classesand the services they should have access to. This is easy to handle with few students, butcould be much work in a large-scale system. Many systems allow teachers to form groupsand establish discussion forums. Other systems rely more on system administrators for groupmanagement. In some systems, students may establish services such as chatting sessionsand group calendars.

Some comments express lack of functionality and tools for grading and examinationresults. Other comments indicate that there are many options and tools available for onlineassignments and that course designers should utilize the special pedagogical opportunitiesthat are available online.

Some interviewees focus on the ability of teachers or students to follow the students’activity and progress. Other interviewees describe the administrative challenges of trackingstudents with individual progress plans.

Some comments express a need for improved administrative systems between tutor andinstitution. The contact between tutors and the institution could be supported by special con-tracts, separate discussion forums, support services, face-to-face seminars, and training.

AdministrationSome institutions have no need for integration between the LMS system and the accountingsystem because they do not charge any tuition fees. WebCT does not seem to offer anysupport for payment of fees. NKI has developed the SESAM LMS system, which is fully inte-grated with the accounting system. Most of the institutions have separate accounting sys-tems with little integration with the LMS. Some do, however, express ambitions and needsfor such integration. Online payment via credit cards and special counters for calculation ofvariable fees could be implemented. NKN has special needs since it also handles onlineenrollment on face-to-face courses.

Most of the institutions provide students with individual passwords. There are, however,examples of simple solutions in which many students share one password and advancedsolutions that allow individual students to have just one password to all university systems.Most institutions seem to be pleased with their password systems. But there are divergingopinions on the workload generated by students who forget their passwords. User manage-ment may represent a heavy workload, which could be organized and automated inseveral ways. It is necessary to have a strategy for terminating passwords. Distribution ofvirus could be reduced if the discussion forums are designed properly and encryption couldbe used to provide secure connections.

The interviews indicate that LMS systems are not especially successful in storing andretrieving student records. One institution has established a project to integrate the LMSwith the student management systems; another sees this work as a major challenge. Otherinstitutions have developed separate databases for information that is not handled by theLMS. Several institutions comment on the needs and efforts to integrate LMS systems withnational student management systems in Sweden (LADOK) and Denmark (STADS). The users



of SESAM, CourseKeeper, and Saba claim to have LMS systems that are well integratedwith the student records databases.

Some systems do not include examination and certification records. Other systemsprovide online information about grades. Several of the interviewees are concerned aboutthe opportunities and challenges regarding integration with the administrative system thatrecords student grades. One interviewee from Denmark was concerned about privacyissues and how much information systems should handle with regard to examination andcertification records. Finally, one of the interviewees stated that exams should be larger andmore project oriented to become more supportive of online education.

Some interviewees provide positive statements about the tools for administration ofcourses, classes and tutors. Other statements are more negative. It is especially interestingto observe that several systems seem to lack facilities and services on the level aboveindividual courses.

TechnologyThere are some free LMS systems that follow the open source policy, and the two users ofopen source systems were positive to open standards. There seem to be three categories ofserver solutions, and all seem to work well. In the first category, the institutions have accessto commercial service providers that host the LMS. In the second category, the institutionshost the LMS for internal use. And in the third category, the institutions host the LMS for inter-nal use and as a service to other institutions. The institutions that have access to a serviceprovider that hosts the LMS seem to be positive to the solution, but they experience someproblems with limited access. Several institutions have chosen to host the LMS internally.They are typically either the institutions that have self-developed systems or larger institu-tions with high internal ICT competence that can operate commercial LMS systemslocally. The users of the commercial systems claim that the systems are stable and reli-able. The users of self-developed systems also experience few problems. Virus attacksand firewalls, however, are mentioned as serious problems. A few institution that haveself-developed systems host the LMS for internal use and as a service to other institutions.One benefit of this is cost sharing.

FirstClass depends more on client software than other LMS systems. Other commentspoint out that there is no need for any special client software. However, problems with fire-walls may be difficult to solve. The institutions seem to differ on how much they rely onnecessary client software for special courses. Several institutions seem to minimize the needfor additional client software. But some special courses and subjects, for example concern-ing statistics, require additional client software. And other systems and courses rely withmore or less success on additional client software such as special plugins or MicrosoftOffice products.

LMS systems could be perceived as flexible, since both course content and systemservices can be updated regularly. Technology and templates limit the flexibility of thedidactics, but may increase productivity. The interviewees are aware of the e-learning



standards specifications, and several claim that their system follows the standards. But fewclaim that the standards are important to their institution.

The interviewees talk about LMS systems as large-scale systems capable of handlingthousands of users. The interviewees are confident that the systems can handle a largenumber of users without special technological problems. The interviewees did not seem tobe concerned about how the systems technically could organize the administration of largenumbers of students, courses, and tutors. One mentioned, though, that large-scale opera-tion might impose some pedagogical challenges.

Some comments express the fact that students have all kinds of connections to the Inter-net ranging from low-speed modems to broadband access. But the speed of the LMSsystem does not seem to be any problem. The bottleneck seems to be network bandwidthand local lines. To handle this, the institutions adapt their bandwidth requirements to theusers’ equipment. Due to the bandwidth limitations, several of the institutions limit their useof high bandwidth content.

Economic IssuesSome of the interviewees view the cost of the LMS as confidential information. Others saythat it is hard to estimate or that they don’t know. The main costs reported on self-developedsystems are related to a few positions in a development team and to server hardware andsoftware. The costs and pricing structure of commercial systems vary from system to system.This may make it difficult to compare the real prices. The costs mentioned range from under€ 5,000 to over € 100,000 per year. None of the interviewees expressed sincere con-cern about high prices.

One obvious advantage of self-developed systems is that the institutions pay no annualfees. Commercial systems have various pricing structures and prices for annual fees. Thefees may depend on the number of user licenses, the number of years the contract is signedfor, or just for actual upgrades.

The Swedish and Finnish institutions report that they have no tuition fees. Institutions inDenmark, Norway, and Iceland do report that they charge tuition fees, although many ofthem also receive additional funding from the state. The research did not find any examplesof institutions that had implemented online invoicing.

As the number of users in an LMS system grows, it seems necessary to divide themanagement and maintenance responsibilities among a number of people. It seems as ifthe interviewees have only a vague knowledge of the systems’ maintenance and operationcosts. The issue is perceived as complex and hard to estimate. Costs may be fundedexternally and they seem to include part-time work for from one to six internal people, butthey may also constitute a fee per student to the ICT-department.

It would seem that the interviewees have little knowledge of how much time and moneyis spent on training staff and students to use LMS systems. External costs may be low, sincetraining primarily seems to be handled by internal staff.



Overall EvaluationThere were several positive comments about the Nordic commercial systems. They werecharacterized as immediate, flexible, and open. The interviewees focused on the ability tosave time and increase quality of learning, as well as the strong communicational and statisti-cal features. It is especially interesting to observe that the interviewees’ value systems supportNordic pedagogical traditions and national, academic user groups. The negative commentsabout the Nordic commercial systems were related to incompatibility with other platformsand products, limited student privileges, and the provider’s uncertain financial situation.

The comments on overall evaluation on WebCT were predominantly positive. The intervie-wees used phrases such as: a good choice, provides all basic tools, works reasonably well,moderately cost-effective, and easy to use. However, it might be hard to get support for localadaptations in Iceland. For example, WebCT version 3 was not available in Icelandic.

The positive comments made about other commercial systems used terms such as simple,flexible, well-working, many features, very satisfied, and provides most of the functionalitywe need. The most noteworthy negative comment about the other commercial systems wasrelated to FirstClass’ use of client software.

The users of self-developed systems are also satisfied with their systems. Some of thereasons for their choice are that they perceive the commercial systems as expensive andcomplex and that they can develop their systems to support their special needs. Among theadvantages that were mentioned were the ability to handle continuous enrollment, cost-effectiveness, and integration with student management systems and accounting systems.

Features in Future LMS SystemsLMS systems could have reached a point where user-friendliness, cost-effectiveness, and inte-gration with other systems are more important than new features. Some interviewees want tointegrate the LMS with existing systems and other services such as student managementsystems, marketing catalogues, online payment, tracking of textbook shipments, registration ofexaminations, and multimedia tools. Others would like to have more flexible systems and tools.Several would like more use of multimedia, especially with regard to audio and video serv-ices. Some topics and languages need better representation of characters, symbols and user-interfaces. Other features the interviewees would like to see in the future were alternative waysto organize and visualize the learning process, better tools for synchronous communication,better ways to personalize design elements, and more national and international collaboration.

Important Nordic LMS FindingsThe analysis resulted in several important findings that are listed in the following and sortedaccording to Nordic issues, integration issues, economic issues, and issues of specialinterest to providers of LMS systems. The findings presented in List 8 are especially relatedto Nordic issues:



List 8. Six important LMS findings related to Nordic issues

Other important findings are related to the increasing need for integration between LMSsystems and other online education support systems:

1. LMS systems need to be integrated with a number of other systems in an organizationthat aims at providing efficient, large-scale, online education.

2. Integration between LMS systems and student management systems seems to be rela-tively poor.

3. Integration between LMS-systems and accounting systems seems to be very poor.4. Several of the interviewees are concerned about the opportunities and challenges

regarding integration with the administrative system that records student grades.

Cost-effectiveness becomes more important as institutions become large-scale providers ofonline education, and the following findings are related to economic issues:

1. The costs and pricing structure for commercial systems varies from system to system.This could make it difficult to compare the real costs.

1. LMS systems seem to be widely used in Nordic higher, further, and continuingeducation. It is not easy to find such Nordic institutions without experience ofLMS systems.

2. The analysis indicates that there is a clear trend towards large-scale online edu-cation in the Nordic countries. It shows that 12 of the 20 institutions offer atleast 50 online courses. According to the 1998-99 Cisaer analysis, (Paulsen2000) only 3 of 22 Nordic institutions surveyed offered more than 50 onlinecourses three years ago. Further, the interviewees talk about LMS systems aslarge-scale systems capable of handling thousands of users.

3. The Nordic universities have standardized a few national student managementsystems. The systems are LADOK (Sweden), MSTAS (Norway), FS (Norway),STADS (Denmark), INNA (Iceland) and to some extent Oodi (Finland).

4. Nordic institutions seem to prefer LMS-systems developed in the Nordic countries.Among the 25 different LMS systems that were identified in the analysis, 16 wereof Nordic origin. All other systems were of American, Canadian, or Irish origin.

5. The research indicates that Classfronter, WebCT, FirstClass, and BlackBoardseem to be the most used LMS systems in the Nordic countries.

6. The interviewees are aware of the e-learning standards, and several claim thattheir systems follow the standards. But few state that the standards are impor-tant to their institution, and e-learning standards do not seem to have had muchimpact on online education in the Nordic countries.



2. The interviewees have only vague knowledge of the systems’ maintenance and operat-ing costs. The issue is perceived as complex and hard to estimate. Further, it seems theyhave little knowledge about how much time and money is spent on training staff andstudents to use LMS systems.

Finally, these findings should be of special interest to providers of LMS systems who want tocompete in the future market:

1. The institutions do not seem to be especially loyal to, or dependent on, one provider ofLMS systems. The majority of the institutions had changed system, planned to changesystem, or operated secondary systems.

2. LMS systems may have reached a point where user-friendliness, cost-effectiveness, andintegration with other systems is more important than new features.

3. The open source strategy may have an impact on the future LMS market.4. LMS systems are usually not used for development of course content. A broad range of

external tools is used to develop the content before it is published in the LMS system.5. It is especially interesting to observe that several systems seem to lack facilities and

services on the level above individual courses.6. Several institutions prefer self-developed systems. They perceive the commercial systems

as expensive and complex and want to develop systems to support their special needs.They wanted cost-effective systems with the ability to handle continuous enrollment andintegration with student management systems and accounting systems.

ReferencesHillefors, L., B. Myringer, B. Svanteson, I. Rathsman, and M. Gisselberg, 2001. Ett Nät-universitet för livslångt lärande och kompetensutveckling. Rapport från en utredning utförd påuppdrag av styrelserna för Distanskonsortiet, Svenska Distanshögskolan ock Västsvenskakonsortiet för flexibelt lärande.

Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2002. No. 2, March 2002. LeadingLearning Platforms: International Market Presence.(www.obhe.ac.uk/products/briefings/pdfs/LearningPlatforms.pdf)

Paulsen, M. F. 2000. Online Education. An International Analysis of Web-based Educationand Strategic Recommendations for Decision Makers, Oslo: NKI Forlaget,(http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten/artikler/Online_Education.pdf)

Ranebo, S. 2001. A Nordic Survey of National Initiatives for the Development of VirtualUniversities. Nordiska ministerrådets IT-policygrupp. (www.norden.org/it-p/dok/NORDIC_VIRTUAL_UNIVERSITIES.pdf)

Runnestø, R. and G. Ristesund. 2002. Experiences with Learning Management Systems inNorwegian Universities and Colleges. (www.nettskolen.com/forskning/Diploma%20project.pdf)




http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten/artikler/Online_Education.pdf

www.norden.org/itp/dok/NORDIC_VIRTUAL_UNIVERSITIES.pdf

www.norden.org/itp/dok/NORDIC_VIRTUAL_UNIVERSITIES.pdf



Online Learning in Denmark:A Personal AccountBy Søren Nipper

Søren Nipper is Head of Department at UNI•C – TheDanish IT Centre for Education and Research. He hasworked with distance learning and online learning since1982, in Denmark as well as abroad. In the early 1980s hewas involved in setting up Jutland Open University and its firstdistance learning programs. From 1988 till 1993 he workedfor EuroPACE, a European industry-university consortium thatdelivered high-level training programs to professionals, man-agers and researchers via satellite and computer networks.From 1995 to 2000 he worked for the European Commis-

sion in Brussels and the European Training Foundation in Turin. His assignments includedthe establishment of a network of 50 distance education study centers in Central andEastern Europe. He joined UNI•C in 2000.

Online learning was introduced in Denmark in 1982. The following 16 years it led aquiet, modest and rather secluded life as a mostly experimental and, in the bigger pictureof Danish education and training, marginal phenomenon. However, in 1998, it becameVery Big Business. Almost overnight.

The Big Bang, Big Business and BigBucks of 1998Within a few months in 1998 tens of thousands of adults enrolled on online courses, andmany institutions, mostly business and technical colleges, made Really Big Bucks providingcourses via the Internet, primarily the ECDL course (European Computer Driving Licence®).Three factors helped catapult online learning in general, and the ECDL course in particular,into being a business opportunity:


© Søren Nipper 2003

■ Business and government suddenly realised that Denmark was in desperate need of anIT-literate workforce. The government initiated a scheme of tax reduction incentivesaimed at companies willing to invest in IT-equipment for its staff and employees willingto spend time on IT-training outside working hours21. Blue-collar and white-collaremployees suddenly realised that IT-competences would be an important career assetand job security parameter, even in the short term.

■ The required technology and infrastructure suddenly had been distributed to a sufficientlylarge part of Danish society in order to ensure the critical mass required for business-driven development and delivery of online learning. In 1998 PCs and Internet accesswere available in more than 50% of Danish households and in virtually every publicand private organisation.

■ The average Dane suddenly had acquired the basic IT-literacy required in order toconnect to and make use of an online learning resource.

The 1998 Big Bang (well, big in Denmark, probably modest on an international scale)once again demonstrated that distance education and technology-based learning evolvesat the crossing point of three converging paths:

■ the emergence of new competence needs;■ the availability and affordability of a media and technology infrastructure;■ the literacy of the learners.

It was the same type of convergence that paved the way for the correspondence schools inthe middle of the 19th century, as well as for the large-scale open universities with their useof radio, television and printed course material in the 1960s and 1970s. But that’s anentirely different story. Or is it?

Anyway, you are probably asking yourself how on earth it was possible to sustain –educationally as well as organisationally - a business increase from next-to-nothing to a multi-million EUR/USD/DKK turnover within one year? The answer is that it was not. Todaymany of the online learning programmes that emerged during 1998-1999 have beenclosed down or have levelled off with a significantly lower turnover of students and rev-enues. There are several reasons for this. The government’s decision to discontinue the taxincentive scheme had an immediate and damaging (some would claim healing) impact.The deflation of the dot-com bubble further worsened the climate for online learning. Whichis a paradox, incidentally. The needs remained, and the technology still was there. Again,that’s an entirely different story. Or is it?

In my view, however, the most important factor was that these entrepreneurial initiativesrather quickly got quite a bad reputation for being of poor pedagogical quality.



21 Actually the government’s incentive package also included healthy financial support to vocationalcolleges, which offered the ECDL course. The volume of support-eligible courses turned out to bemuch bigger than forecast and for budget management reasons the government subsequentlyreduced its support by 50% only six months after it’s coming into force.

Most of the colleges and course providers that profited from the explosive surge in IT-literacy courses were badly prepared. They had no or very little prior experience of onlineeducation. Their teaching staff had no or little experience of developing online learningmaterial or of teaching online. Their administration and support organisations were notgeared toward managing a cohort of thousands of online students. Their IT departmentshad no or little experience of setting up and operating Web-based learning systems.Quality management systems were not in place.22 Dropout rates were very high.

Was it all just bad, then? Certainly not, and I’ll come back to that later. But first, let’shave a quick look further backwards at what happened during the 16 years leading up tothe Big Bang, Big Business, and Big Bucks in 1998.

Years of Experiments: The Emergence ofCollaborative Learning and CBTThere are two main philosophies or schools in distance learning:

■ One, which puts emphasis on the learning material, and which considers teaching andlearning to be a highly structured activity in which the learner is guided by and interactswith the learning material, and through this process acquires new knowledge.

■ Another, which puts emphasis on the learning process and which considers teachingand learning to be an organic, or chaotic, process in which the learner constructs newknowledge through his/her task-oriented work with the material, and is guided byinterpersonal interaction with tutors and fellow learners.

For the sake of simplicity – and well aware of my crude oversimplification – I’ll put the labelInstructional Design23 on the former and the label Collaborative Learning on the latter. For anumber of reasons – tradition, culture, costs, demography, amongst others – the latter domi-nated Danish online learning initially for many years.

With a few, admittedly outstanding, exceptions, online learning in Denmark throughoutthe 1980s and the 1990s was dominated by ‘projects’, i.e. small-scale pilots with a life-time limited to the duration of the grant on which they were based, on average between 1and 3 years. Funding typically would come from EU R&D programmes such as the DELTAand Telematics programmes, and from national innovation programmes. In a few cases,large IT vendors, such as IBM, sponsored projects.

On the one hand the pilot approach and the development experiments helped build upconsiderable experience of both technical and pedagogical aspects of online learning. On

O N L I N E L E A R N I N G I N D E N M A R K : A P E R S O N A L A C C O U N T


22 The Danish Ministry of Education in collaboration with a number of business colleges three yearslater, in 2001, developed a quality framework for e-learning within further adult education. The reportis available (in Danish) at www.ventures.dk/files/q_materiale/kval-udv-e-learn.pdf.

23 The philosophy of Instructional Design can be found in many different types of distance learning,including correspondence teaching, CBT/WBT, and, to a certain degree, in the ‘package model’ ofthe large distance teaching universities.

www.ventures.dk/files/q_materiale/kval-udv-e-learn.pdf

the other hand, as is often the case with ‘projects’, there would rarely be the organisationalmechanisms or awareness required in order to ensure that the innovative ideas and enthusi-asm, the accumulated know-how and experience, would be captured and exploited furtherat either operational or strategic levels in institutions. Experience would be confined to theindividual pioneers who had initiated the projects and who raised the funding. Know-howand experience of techniques and methods would vaporise once the project had beencompleted, or it would survive as a small and discrete island in the bigger sea of conven-tional education and training.

Only a few institutions and training organisations took the full step to build in onlinelearning as an integral part of their mainstream operations and business strategies, and itwas not until 1995 that we, with the establishment of the Danish National Centre for Tech-nology Supported Learning24, got a national forum and community for exchange anddissemination of experience and information on online learning.

Why did it take more than ten years for online learning to reach a level of operationaland business maturity beyond the pilot scheme in Denmark? Again, it’s a rhetorical ques-tion, the answer to which applies not only to Denmark, but … well, at least, to mostEuropean countries.

Above I pointed to the three converging paths leading to new paradigms in distance edu-cation: competence needs, infrastructure development, and learner literacy. The simple answerto my rhetorical question is, obviously, that convergence had not been established sufficientlyfirmly for the decision- and policy-makers, or sufficiently clearly for the learners, for online learn-ing to take off on a larger scale when the concept was introduced in Denmark in 1982.

Visionary academics and industrialists with untiring enthusiasm did point out the poten-tials of the emerging information and communication technologies, i.e. the networked com-puter. They also realised that new paradigms of adult education – today known as LifelongLearning - had to be developed. But the working organisations, public as well as private,were still too traditional and inflexible in their strategic thinking about ‘competence develop-ment’ to be able to cope with innovative ways to acquire new knowledge and new skills.The infrastructure was there, in principle. But the technology was still unstable and moreoften than not a pain in the neck to cope with for ordinary people without a fairly strong IT-background. In those days it really did require a fair amount of enthusiastic patience withtechnology in order just ‘to connect’. So, convergence was still far away.

CMC and Collaborative LearningNevertheless, my personal timestamp for the introduction of online learning in Denmark is1982 and the launch of Jutland Open University’s first distance study programmes. I wouldlike to explain why: Jutland Open University was the first Danish initiative to adopt themodels of online learning which later developed internationally into a theoretical andmethodological framework: Collaborative Learning. Morten Flate Paulsen provides an in-depth discussion of this framework in Part One of this book.



24 See www.ctu.dk. In 2000 CTU was merged with Learning Lab Denmark (see www.lld.dk).

www.lld.dk

www.ctu.dk

Jutland Open University did not invent the idea of applying Computer-Mediated Commu-nication (CMC) to distance education. It was introduced in 1981 by the pioneering andlegendary but now defunct School of Management and Strategic Studies at the WesternBehavioral Sciences Institute (WBSI) in the USA.

Actually, the first Danish online courses did not happen until 1984, but Jutland OpenUniversity developed the concept of 3rd Generation Distance Learning. The core of thisconcept is the perception of the learning process as a social process, i.e. a process that iscarried by the cognitive, task-oriented and social interaction among the participants. Inshort, communication and dialogue. Although heavily influenced by the group- and project-oriented approach to learning developed at Danish universities in the 1970s, the conceptwas firmly rooted in a longstanding Danish tradition of learning through ‘the living word’(as opposed to the printed word). 3rd Generation Distance Learning fitted badly into theprint and one-way media dependent models and methods that were developed initially bythe correspondence schools (1st Generation) and later, during the second half on the 20th

century, enhanced technologically and logistically by the large-scale open universities ofSouth Africa, the United Kingdom and Germany (2nd Generation). Further, Denmark is asmall country and does not offer the economies of scale required for the operation of 1st

and 2nd Generation Distance Learning.Jutland Open University therefore from day one looked around for flexible and inexpen-

sive models for course development and delivery, and for media and technologies thatwould facilitate and support human-human interaction and communication. It found themedia solution to this organisational and pedagogical problem in CMC, more specificallyin computer conferencing.

The collaborative learning concept gained foothold in Denmark. It became and still isan influential paradigm for online learning, in particular within, albeit not limited to, the ter-tiary education sector. As a matter of fact, the collaborative online learning initiatives thatwere launched during the 1980s and 1990s covered a wide variety of public and privateorganisations, target groups and types of education and training programmes, from multi-annual university degree programmes, to short training modules aimed at trade union repre-sentatives. Examples of collaborative online learning at tertiary level would be the success-ful and still running Master of Health Informatics programme, run by Aalborg Universitysince 1993, and the equally successful and still running Bachelor of Commerce programwhich has been developed and delivered by a consortium, called Fleksibel Merkonom orMerkoflex for short, of 18 business colleges since 1995. Another pioneering institution isthe Nørre Nissum Teacher Training College, which started out with full curricular pro-grammes online in the late 1980s. It is still running and being further developed. NørreNissum Teacher Training College was one of the first (and is still one of the few) Danisheducational institutions, which early on demonstrated the foresight and audacity to integrateonline learning into its organisational strategy. One outstanding example of collaborativeonline learning within the area of informal training is the Danish Trade Union of PublicEmployees (mostly organising unskilled service personnel), which since 1994 has operateda unique online distance education programme for thousands of its local trade union repre-



sentatives - with records of extraordinarily low dropout rates and extraordinarily high learn-ing outcome scores.

The strong emphasis on social and collaborative processes influenced the technologyand media strategies. Up to a few years ago the focus has been almost exclusively oncommunication. Group-oriented asynchronous CMC technologies such as computer confer-encing and bulletin boards subsequently have played and still play a pivotal role in onlinelearning in Denmark. Throughout the 1980s the choice of system was confined very muchto the family of 1st generation computer conferencing systems such as PortaCOM, EIES,COSY and CONFER. In particular PortaCOM got a fairly wide distribution within Danishonline learning, in spite of its line-oriented and command-driven interface, which most usershated. The advent of client-server technology and graphical user interfaces in the early1990s paved the way for 2nd generation asynchronous CMC systems. The Danish EdWinsystem was developed as a rather simple, but successful graphical offline front-end to Porta-COM. Today FirstClass has established itself as a popular CMC application within tertiary,secondary and primary education.

Synchronous CommunicationIn an educational culture so stubbornly obsessed with, well, almost religiously dedicated to,‘the living word’, one would assume that the synchronous one-to-many or many-to-manycommunication technologies that emerged in the late 1980s would be of particular interestand relevance. However, neither video nor audio conferencing, nor hybrid technologiessuch as audio graphics, have been adapted to any significant degree in Danish educationand training.

The concept and much of the technology had been developed and matured by Ameri-can initiatives such as the Stanford Instructional Television Network (SITN, since 1995 anintegral part of the Web-based Stanford Online) and the National Technological University(NTU), and it was adapted in a number of satellite-based industrial and academic trainingprogrammes in Europe. The growing availability of ISDN helped to boost the educationaluse of video conferencing in other Nordic countries, in particular Finland and Norway, butit still remains a rather exotic phenomenon in Danish online learning.

Video conferencing was applied in a few cases in academic degree programmeswithin Jutland Open University in the early 1990s and by one or two companies for in-house staff training programmes. During the last couple of years there has been a growinginterest in and awareness of the potential of synchronous communication, video conferenc-ing and live video streaming in universities as well as in business. The Danish ResearchNetwork in 2001 launched a 3-year project on the use of video conferences in universityteaching. Most Danish universities are participating in pilot tests.

However, we can see how chat as a near-synchronous form of CMC is getting quitepopular among online learners, and it might be that the Anglo-Saxon LMS systems withtheir audio and video conferencing add-on modules will help promote the use of synchro-nous many-to-many communication in online learning.



CBT and Instructional DesignCBT – Computer Based Training – and Instructional Design concepts did evolve in parallelwith Collaborative Learning during the late 1980s and 1990s, but almost exclusivelywithin the corporate and business related training environments and, up to the emergenceof the World Wide Web, almost exclusively on stand-alone media such as the laserdiscand the CD-ROM. The finance industry in particular and large corporations and organisa-tions such as the Danish State Railway (DSB) were some of the early adopters of CBT andInstructional Design concepts.

Today Instructional Design methods are being adopted by a growing number of Danishcompanies and organisations, e.g. trade unions, with large target groups and/or time-critical training programmes, e.g. application training or sales staff training25. Web BasedTraining – different media, but basically the same as CBT – seems to respond to the com-panies’ search for more cost-and time-effective training methods. Interestingly enough,certain elements of Instructional Design methods and Instructional Design technologies, inparticular LMS systems, are popping up in educational environments which traditionallywould be sanctuaries for the philosophy of Collaborative Learning, e.g. the universities.What is it that LMS systems offer?

Why Collaborative Learning and why not Instructional Design?Leaving out the basic conceptual and pedagogical differences, there is another importantreason why Collaborative Learning ‘won’ over Instructional Design during the first 10 to 15years of development and experimentation in Danish online learning: cost.

The development of a Collaborative Learning programme is much faster and many timesless expensive than the development of a CBT/WBT course. Lead time, up-front investment,and amortisation period (return on investment) are very, very different parameters in Collab-orative Learning as compared to Instructional Design, which still is a very costly designmethodology. It was the small-scale economy of Collaborative Learning that enabledDanish institutions to adapt online learning in the first place, and it was the large-scaleeconomy of Instructional Design that left CBT out of mainstream online learning in Denmarkfor several years.

Asynchronous CMC still is a cornerstone of Danish online learning, and is one of themain reasons why it was so difficult for the large Anglo-Saxon LMS systems of the 1980sand 1990s, such as PLATO, TopClass and Lotus LearningSpace to find a market in Den-mark. However, as indicated, that too is changing.

The apparent problem with the technology and media strategy of Collaborative Learn-ing is that the CMC technology is not designed for learning purposes or for the manage-ment of learning organisations. It was and is designed for communication. It is notdesigned for managing online organisations and it does not embed tools for production of



25 According to a market survey undertaken by Institut for Konjunktur-Aanalyse in Spring 2003, asmany as 62% of larger Danish companies plan to increase their use of e-learning. The survey includedinterviews with 300 private and public companies that already are users of e-learning. Seewww.ifka.dk.

www.ifka.dk

learning material – learning objects as the jargon goes nowadays. This is no problem aslong as the dominating type of learning material is text, which is delivered by the teacherto the learners as attachments to mail or conference messages. Word processors are com-pletely adequate tools for the production of text-based learning material. And it is noproblem as long as the online learning offering is a low-volume activity with a few hundredstudents that can be managed by a relatively small proportion of the teaching and admini-strative staff.

But as the number of online students increases, as the learning material grows in mediacomplexity and volume, as online assessments become a part of the learning activity, as alarger proportion of the teaching staff get involved in online teaching tasks, and as theadministration has to put a large volume of learner progress data on record – well, then,new tools are needed which can help to streamline the management of this business organ-isation.

The Achilles’ heel of Collaborative Learning is that it scales so badly. And the ability toscale in a controlled and manageable way is a substantial and timely requirement inDanish online learning right now, after the many happy years of small experiments and thetotally unprepared Big Bang of 1998. LMS systems respond to this need. With their inte-gration of tools for content production, automated content delivery, learner monitoring, test-ing and progress tracking and, not least, integration with proprietary student and HRadministrative systems, LMS systems spring from the very root of Instructional Design. And ifthere is one thing that Instructional Design does extremely well, then it is …to scale. Auto-mated learning by its very nature has no upper limit as to the size of sustainable andmanageable learner groups. Collaborative Learning, on the contrary, operates only accept-ably at almost the same student-teacher ratio as conventional face-to-face teaching26.

The question, therefore, is whether Instructional Design will seize the future of onlinelearning and whether Collaborative Design will loose momentum and gradually beconfined to a small cosy, privileged academic corner at the periphery of e-learning?

The Point of Convergence and the Coming of Age in Danish Online LearningDuring the second half of the 1990s the dot-com hysteria in general, and a series of highlyprofiled, frequently quoted and totally unsolicited market forecast analyses in particular, cre-ated a fertile and mushrooming environment for e-learning ventures. The explosive surge inonline IT-literacy courses described above was just one example. Many other new trainingproviders and vendors of e-learning systems surfaced during this breathless gründer period –



26 Professor Greville Rumble, one of the leading researchers on the costs and economics of distanceeducation, has provided a crisp analysis of the financial complexity of CMC and Asynchronous Learn-ing Networks (ALN) in his excellent and provocative paper Just How Relevant is E-education? (in OpenLearning, Volume 16 Number 3, 2001).

and disappeared again, leaving behind in its maelstrom a somewhat sceptical and disillu-sioned attitude to e-learning.

From Project Organisation to Business OrganisationBut we have reached the point of convergence of the needs, the infrastructure and theliteracy, and I am firmly convinced that online learning within a very short span of time willdiffuse into all sectors of education and training in Danish society. From being based insmall and disconnected project organisations, online learning will become, therefore,increasingly dependent on effective business organisations - in the wider, both commercialand non-commercial, sense of ‘business organisation’.

And this is where the need for new tools for the management of online learningemerges. I would like to exemplify this with a snapshot of a Danish e-learning programme:The Pedagogical ICT Licence.

The Pedagogical ICT LicenceThe Pedagogical ICT Licence (Pædagogisk IT-kørekort ®) is the brand name of a series ofonline in-service teacher training programmes for the pedagogical use of ICT in educa-tion27. The programmes are fundamentally different from ECDL® in that they focus on thepedagogical techniques and methods rather than on the technology in itself. The Pedagogi-cal ICT Licence was launched in 1999 and there are currently eight programmes, each tar-geted at and designed individually for different sectors and teacher groups within primaryeducation, general and vocational upper secondary education, and tertiary and furthereducation (excluding higher education). All stakeholders, including the Ministry of Educa-tion, municipal and county authorities, and teachers’ trade unions, underwrite the pro-grammes and guarantee their relevance and quality. The programmes are designed as‘collaborative blended learning’, and the participants are organised in either school-basedor virtual teams, and collaborate online as well as in physical groups whenever possible.A programme typically consists of 7 to 8 modules, some of which are compulsory andsome optional. For the optional modules participants can pick and mix from pools ofmodules (from 3 to 30, depending on the specific programme) according to their ownpersonal interests and training priorities.

In principle, therefore, each participant can design his own, individual course. Itshould be noted that the modules are not designed as programmed, automatedWBT/CBT material with built-in tests. The courses are designed as team-oriented andtutor-led study programmes and each participant has his/her own personal tutor/mentor.From an administrative and co-ordination point of view this is a dramatic variable, whichputs strong requirements on the course management tools and navigation tools thatshould be available to all players: the course providers, the tutors and the course partici-pants. Now, put the personalised course structure into the following statistical matrix (asof July 2003):



27 See www.school-it.org

www.school-it.org

■ 58,000 participants have enrolled since the start.■ 35,000 participants have completed their courses and obtained the Pedagogical ICT

Licence.■ There are 170 regional and local course providers.■ There are 800 certified tutors, who have to participate in annual tutoring-skill upgrading

sessions in order to retain their certification.■ The course material includes printed set books for each of the 8 programmes, more

than 6,300 web pages (self-contained web documents), and over 1,000 articles (inWord or PDF formats). Most of the articles are available in several versions – depend-ing on the target group.

■ Over 100 course editors and course writers maintain the online and printed coursematerial and ensure its currency.

The operation of a high-volume, content rich and continuously updated course programmesuch as the Pedagogical ICT Licence, within a highly decentralised organisation ofproviders, tutors, editors and participants, requires powerful and flexible learning manage-ment tools.

Take the Campus Online – Sure, But How?The LMS systems used in the Pedagogical ICT Licence are purpose-built; however the largecommercial systems, mainly the Anglo-Saxon products, are slowly finding a market withinboth corporate/government training and public education in Denmark.

A case in point is the universities, which are confronted with a very real and tangibleneed to innovate their teaching practices and to turn their 800-year old organisationalstructure upside down. It is a dramatic paradigm shift, which eventually will go to the verycore of the academic teaching culture, and it is much too complex for me to discuss indetail in this short chapter28. It is sort of summarised by the American-Austrian economistPeter Drucker, who in an interview with Forbes Magazine (March 1997) in his trademarkno-nonsense style claimed that

“Thirty years from now the big university campuses will be relics. Universities won’tsurvive. It’s as large a change as when we first got the printed book. […] Alreadywe are beginning to deliver more lectures and classes off campus via satellite ortwo-way video at a fraction of the cost [of classical university teaching]. The col-



28 The literature, however, is rich. The issue was introduced by Diana Laurillard in 1993 in her momen-tous book Rethinking University Teaching (Routledge, London and New York, 1993 and later edi-tions). Tony Bates in 2000 took the analysis further in his book Managing Technological Change(Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco 2000). For a summary of his analysis, see his paper DistanceEducation in Dual Mode Higher Education Institutions: Challenges and Changes (SOFF 2000, availableat http://bates.cstudies.ubc.ca/). Dancing With the Devil – Information Technology and the New Com-petition in Higher Education (Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco 1999), edited by Richard N. Katz,provides an instructive insight into the business-oriented approach to the paradigm shift at Americanuniversities.

http://bates.cstudies.ubc.ca/

lege won’t survive as a residential institution. Today’s buildings are hopelesslyunsuited and totally unseeded.”

The changes in university teaching of course have sparked vitriolic opposition from withinthe academic community, initially in North America where the development has started ear-lier and is much more fast-paced than in Europe29.

Basically what is happening is what Tony Bates calls the convergence between tradi-tional on-campus teaching and distance learning. The convergence is happening inresponse to a number of factors, notably the need for time- and place-flexible learningmodes created by demographic changes within the student population and the emergenceof Lifelong Learning, the transformation of the university from an elitist Alma Mater to amass-education provider, and, not to be forgotten, the expectations and demands of moreand more technology-savvy students. Add to that the internationalisation of higher educa-tion, and you’ve got a sketchy picture of the developments that are pushing the traditionaluniversities online.

And pushing seems to be needed. Of the 11 Danish universities only two or three havedeveloped a pro-active institutional strategy for the development of online learning. To myknowledge there are no surveys and quantitative analyses of the uptake of online learningin European higher education30, but my guess is that the general European picture is prettymuch identical to the particular Danish situation – with the United Kingdom and its verybusiness-oriented universities as the exception. In comparison, a Sloan Consortium study ofonline learning in American higher education shows that 97.6% of all public higher educa-tion institutions in the USA offer online learning degree programmes and courses, either asfully online programmes or as hybrid (blended) formats31. But even if most European andScandinavian universities are dragging their feet, online learning will eventually be pushedonto the classical campuses by their student constituencies and the hard-hearted forces ofthe higher education market.

With large cohorts of students online and with a considerable portion of degree pro-grammes and for-credit courses converted partly or fully into online formats, the universitieswill need seamless and powerful integration of their online learning environments and their



29 David F. Noble’s 1997 essay Digital Diploma Mills: The Automation of Higher Education is one of thewidest spread and most quoted examples of the traditionalist criticism of the use of technology inhigher education. Prof. Noble’s essay was first published in the peer-reviewed internet journal FirstMonday and is available at www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue3_1/noble/index.html.

30 There actually is! The European Commission Directorate General for Education and Culture recentlycommissioned a large and comprehensive study of Virtual Models of European Universities. TheCommission expects the report to be published during fall 2003 or Winter 2004. The EuropeanSchoolnet project in January 2003 published a survey of “Virtual Learning Environments forEuropean Schools“, however as the title indicates with a focus on primary and secondaryeducation (see http://insight.eun.org).

31 The study was conducted during March-June 2003. Preliminary conclusions available atwww.sloan-c.org/publications/view/v2n4/datav2n4.htm.

www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue3_1/noble/index.html

http://insight.cun.org

www.sloan-c.org/publications/view/v2n4/datav2n4.htm

student management systems. My guess is that we over a (short) period of years will se twoworlds collide in this process: The world of the teaching staff and the world of the universityadministration. I see this reflected in two different approaches to LMS systems at Danish uni-versities: the bottom-up, departemental approach versus the top-down, corporateapproach.

The bottom-up, consensus-driven approach is solidly rooted in the 800-year-old universityculture of departmental and academic autonomy: No one is going to decide for me whatsystem I’m going to use in my online teaching! Basta! In some universities we therefore find,within the same campus, in some cases even within the same faculty, what I prefer to call arich variety of different LMS systems, CMC systems and document management systemsused in online learning. Some are commercially available products, some are homemadeby small teams of faculty members or individual faculty members. Some of the systems areintegrated with the central student administration system, however, most are not.

In the top-down, business-driven corporate approach the university’s central IT PlanningCommission is given the mandate to select one system for the entire campus, i.e. all facul-ties and departments, all faculty members, all students and all administrative units. To myknowledge so far four Danish universities have procured LMS systems based on a top-downdecision to adopt one system.

At the time of writing of this chapter I know of the following systems in Danish universi-ties: FirstClass, SiteScape, CampusNet, Blackboard, QuickPlace, VirtualU, BSCW andLUVIT plus, as said, a fair number of homemade systems. And I am pretty sure that my list isnot exhaustive.

Considering the traditional European university culture and the still prevailing manage-ment structures in higher education, I appreciate the virtues and qualities of the bottom-upapproach, however, I am sceptical as to whether it will be sustainable in the longer term.The migration of student progress data into the central student administration system is notrivial pursuit and the integration of online learning systems with administrative systems isenormously costly and technically complex. No university can afford to integrate five or sixdifferent departmental online learning systems into the central administration system.

How will the universities handle the clash between, on the one hand, business rationaleand, on the other, pedagogical autonomy and flexibility?

Learning, Management and Systems - A Ménage à Trois?It will be interesting to see how the LMS systems, with their strong roots in InstructionalDesign and their powerful tools for the automated monitoring, management and recordingof learning and teaching activities, will merge with Danish educational culture and its fun-damentalist belief in the teacher’s indisputable and unlimited pedagogical-methodologicalfreedom. The very concept of systems which manage learning is something foreign toDanish educational thinking. Systems should be used to support learning. The managementof learning activities and learning actors is best left with people.

On the other side, to be an excellent professional, one needs excellent working tools,and the growing interest in LMS systems, also within public education, indicates to me that



the one-dimensional CMC strategy of Collaborative Learning is a cul-de-sac, and fails indelivering these tools to the learners, teachers and administrators in online learning. LMSsystems and Learning Content Management Systems as we know them today may notprovide the final solution, but they do address at least three emerging requirements32:

■ tools for production, delivery and management of digital learning material;■ tools for monitoring learner activities and progress;■ tools for the management of learner data and the integration between online learning

systems and proprietary student management systems and HR systems.

Research on the new teacher role in online learning has focused much on the mentor roleand the online tutoring skills of the teacher. I am convinced that the teacher will retainhis/her pivotal role as both mentor, didactic guide and subject matter expert in the learner-centered world of online education, and I appreciate the importance of further researchinto this. However, on top of moving his/her classical teaching competences from thelecture theatre to the online environment, and on top of transforming ex cathedra lecturesinto an interactive online dialogue (asynchronous or synchronous), the online teacher willhave to perform a new role, for which he/she is totally unprepared. He/she is to a grow-ing extent going to be a designer, producer and distributor of online learning material.He/she will need to develop skills in the (pedagogical) design and technical production ofdigital and even multimedia learning material. We are talking about changing a more than800-year-old form of academic discourse into a fundamentally new format. It is learning acompletely new language and, believe me, that is no trivial pursuit. And that is not all: theteacher must be able to manage the material that he/she designs and produces, i.e. topublish it in an accessible and readable format on a website, to revise it and to keep trackof revisions, to copy it from a fall course to a spring course, to control access if access isrestricted, to ensure that his copyrights and intellectual rights are not violated and that hedoes not himself infringe the rights of third parties, and so on. Add to this the emergingcomplex standards – technical as well as procedural – that are being developed fore-learning in general and for e-learning material, learning objects, in particular. Is yourlecture today SCORM-compliant, Professor?33



32 I am grateful to my colleague Kurt Nikolajsen, Head of Department at UNI•C – The Danish ITCentre for Education and Research, for having pointed out to me why and how these requirementsemerge.

33 In his paper Distance Learning: Promise or Threat (1999), one of the fathers of Collaborative Learning,Professor Andrew Feenberg, San Diego State University, has produced a provocative and excellentanalysis of how the new role of the teacher as a producer and administrator of digital content willmake the classical, dialogue-based teaching competences obsolete. His point is that the shift inonline learning from discursive media (such as computer conferencing and video conferencing) toautomated teaching through Content Management Systems will “deskill” university teachers. Avail-able at www.rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/feenberg/TELE3.HTM

www.rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/feenberg/TELE3.HTM

It is easy to understand that an institution or training provider looks for ways to ease thepain caused by this transformation of teacher roles and teacher competences. Painless itwill never be, but more and more institutions are looking at LMS systems and LearningContent Management Systems as a means to shortcut the transformation process.

And basically most LMS systems of today are Content Management Systems. In thissense they refer back to the philosophy or school of distance learning that emphasises theauthoritative role of the learning material as the didactical and cognitive guide of the learn-ing process. Will LMS systems be the renaissance of correspondence teaching?

Keeping track of the learners, assessing their progress, supporting and advising them,when they need it, is another key teaching skill which gets new dimensions and new for-mats in online learning. Again, Collaborative Learning in my view has not produced effec-tive learner monitoring tools to make it easy for the teacher to monitor progress. And againthe new generation of LMS systems present themselves with a suite of powerful tools forautomated skills (knowledge) analysis, assessment, testing and recording of progress,which seem to respond to the needs of teachers and which integrate online learning withthe student/personnel administrative procedures of institutions and corporations.

What is the flip-side of the glossy Learning (Content) Management Systems of moderndays? Pedagogical uniformity and a Big Brother Control Machine keeping an eye on thelearners’ (and the teachers’!) every little movement on a 24/7 basis? “Straitjackets!” afriend of mine hissed with malice in his voice, when I discussed this with him the other day.And he isn’t even Danish.

I guess it would be fair to all parties involved to say that the organisational and peda-gogical concepts underpinning most modern LMS systems fit badly with Danish educationalculture and with the way Danish educational institutions traditionally organise learner sup-port and learner management. Or vice versa. The world is moving and Danish educationalculture should not be considered a holy cow. It may be just timely to try out some newways of thinking. It will be interesting to see what will change, the systems or the users. Butit is still very early days and there is, to my knowledge, no independent research availableon the pedagogical and organisational impact of LMS systems.

In any event, we are in a peculiar situation. The methodological and pedagogical inno-vation of distance learning during the last 20 years or so has come from the school ofCollaborative Learning. But the technical solution to the organisational and managerialchallenges we are facing, now that distance learning is maturing and coming of age, nowthat competence needs, infrastructure and learner literacy finally converge, is coming fromthe old school of Instructional Design. Have we moved one step forward and two stepsbackwards in the process?

Nothing New Under the SunLove makes you blind. My first encounter with an LMS system was some 20 years ago, in1983 or 1984. A colleague at the then RECAU, the regional computing centre at the Uni-versity of Aarhus, had invited me over to his office to have a look at the PLATO IV system.



What I saw that sunny afternoon was a technologically highly sophisticated environ-ment with touch-sensitive plasma screen. I saw a rich educational resource with thousandsof interactive learning programmes in all sorts of subject fields, from music to COBOLprogramming. I saw community-facilitating communication tools and features such ase-mail, chat rooms, instant messaging and bulletin boards. I saw personalised contentmanagement and publishing tools. I saw tools for interactive storytelling and multiplayergames. I saw online tests seamlessly integrated with student tracking and administrationtools. I saw tools enabling teachers to monitor student activities in real-time, synchronousmode.

I saw a system which was a product of the 1960s mainframe approach to the world, asystem which had the Zeitgeist of the early days of CBT embedded in its very name:Programmed Logic for Automatic Teaching Operations. But basically, what I saw was an LMSsystem which was light-years ahead of its own time, and which had all the features associ-ated with a system designed for collaborative learning34. But I was blind to that. At thattime I had just thrown myself head over heels into an affair with a computer conferencingsystem. My relationship with computer conferencing took me onto a long journey into theworld of online collaborative learning. Now I’ve come to a crossroads and need to findout where to go from here. Exciting!



34 See Brian Dear: Lessons Learned: Interacting with the PLATO System. Lecture given at Stanford Univer-sity in May 2003, available at http://hci.stanford.edu/cs547/abstracts/02-03/030509-dear.html.

http://hci.stanford.edu/cs547/abstracts/02-03/030509-dear.html.

http://hci.stanford.edu/cs547/abstracts/02-03/030509-dear.html.

Anecdote 6. Nordic Virtual Universities

Many institutions around the world use the terms virtual and online universities. Among themare the Nordic governmental initiatives: Nätuniversitetet, Norgesuniversitetet, the unfortunateDanish Virtual University, and the Finnish Virtual University. In my opinion, very few institutionslive up to such an ambitious name – and none of them are located in the Nordic countries.I regard the Nordic virtual universities as governmental initiatives that are established tosupport and promote online education. They work well as portals for higher education asdescribed in the Danish evaluation report Nordiske portaler for uddannelse (www.unev.dk/docs/nordiske_portaler.pdf). In addition the Swedish and Finnish initiatives provide sub-stantial public funding for development of online courses.

The Nordic countries have chosen different strategies regarding public virtual universi-ties. Iceland has not made any decision to establish a national virtual university. Norwaydecided not to have one, but to establish a portal (www.norgesuniversitetet.no) with infor-mation about courses provided by the universities and colleges. The Danish Ministries ofEducation and Research initiated a Danish Virtual University in a mission statement onMarch 27, 2000. The DKr 40 million budget (€ 5,4 million) for the period 2000-2003was intended to support the development of Web-based courses and provide informationabout the courses. The initiative was shut down by the next government, partly as a resultof lacking support from the affected institutions. The only result seems to be a portal provid-ing information about further and continuing education (www.unev.dk). The portal was initi-ated by the Danish University Rectors’ Conference and opened late 2003. In Sweden, Nät-universitetet (www.netuniversity.se) was established in 2002 as a national body to fund andcoordinate the activities.

FVU - The Finnish Virtual University (www.virtualuniversity.fi) is a project organizationthat develops and promotes networking activities among Finnish universities. It was foundedin January 2001 as a consortium of Finnish universities, business enterprises, and researchinstitutes. The initiative was a result of the governmental information strategy for educationand research for 2000-2004. FVU is not a new university. It was set up as a serviceorganization for the 21 existing universities. Hence, the virtual university does not providecourses itself, or award degrees. The courses offered by the virtual university consist ofonline courses provided by universities, aimed mainly at students of undergraduate,graduate or post-graduate degrees. The virtual university provides more flexible opportuni-


www.unev.dk/docs/nordiske_portaler.pdf

www.norgesuniversitetet.no

www.unev.dk


www.virtualuniversity.fi

www.unev.dk/docs/nordiske_portaler.pdf

ties to study online. Students can participate in courses provided by their own university,other universities, or developed jointly by different universities.

Other means of achieving the objectives are guidance, training and networking proj-ects, together with the virtual university development unit, whose task is to advance the useof new methods, tools, materials and services.

The Ministry of Education’s Information Society strategy for 2000 – 2004 includes thefounding of the Finnish Virtual University. A development unit was set up and a number ofdevelopment projects were initiated. The consortium agreement was signed and projectscommenced at the beginning of 2001. Based on the trial, best practices will be estab-lished and taken into broader use, stage by stage, so that the university will be fully func-tional by the end of the strategy period.

FVU provides university students, teachers, researchers and other staff with a virtualcampus through a common portal. The portal provides online services in Finnish, Swedish,and English. The interface can be customised and personalised to suit users’ needs. Theportal will provide access to all that is necessary for online education: course information,enrollment, counselling, advisory, and information services, as well as discussion forums,LMS systems, support services and evaluation tools for teachers and producers of onlinecourses. The basic portal was launched in the autumn of 2001. The complete system willbe operational by the end of 2004.

A strategic goal for the FVU is to promote standardization. According to Director PekkaKess, the FVU is developing support services for Finnish educators to evaluate LMS systemsin order to make an educated selection (when there are options available - which is thecase in many universities). So far the member universities have not given the authority to theFVU to make any selection concerning LMS systems, which means that support comes fromsources within individual universities. It is also up to each university to choose a studentmanagement system. Oodi is gaining ground. Still, less than half of the universities areusing it, but Oodi already serves more than half of all Finnish students. The FVU is workingto make the integration of each separate system possible. This means process modelling,data modelling, and piloting.

“We have over 200 courses offered to our students,” Pekka Kess states, “but no enroll-ment figures since each institution carries out student management. This is done either at thecourse, department or university level. FVU is still very much in the development phase andthe real results can be expected from 2005 onwards. This is a national initiative – makingchanges in all member universities in their cultures, strategies, services and technologiesapplied. The measurement might be: how significant change has been achieved. Wewould like to help the universities to provide cost-effective and sustainable online education.But this could be hard, since the technology freaks do not care about costs. The FVU willbuild services for the great majority and only those products can be cost-effective andsustainable.

Until the end of 2003, the Finnish government will provide all funding for the VirtualUniversity. The students pay no fees. The Ministry of Education finances the project withapproximately € 9 million a year, and The European Social Fund provides additional


funding. The portal receives about € 0.7 million; the rest is used to support online edu-cation projects at individual universities and collaborative projects among the universities.

The Swedish Nätuniversitetet is in many ways similar to the Finnish Virtual University. Bothhave been important initiatives to support and promote online education in their homecountries. But one may question if this is achieved in a cost-effective way, and only thefuture will show how sustainable these initiatives are.


On the Move Towards OnlineEducation in SwedenBy Carl Holmberg

Carl Holmberg is Adviser to the Director-General, Research andDevelopment within the Swedish Agency for Flexible Learning(CFL). He is Chair of European Experts’ Network for Education andTechnology (EENet) and a Member of the Executive Board ofEuropean Distance Education and E-learning Network (EDEN).From 1995 to1999, Holmberg worked as a senior expert to theSwedish Ministry of Education and Science. Between 1999 and

2002 he managed the National research programme Lifelong Learning in the InformationSociety – Conditions for and possibilities within Distance Education. During that period, he wasalso Senior Adviser at the Swedish Agency for Distance Education. Holmberg initiated andled a national network of researchers within Distance Education (DUNET), and he hasserved on the board of national and international organisations. In his different roles he isinvolved in several European Commission-financed projects. Interaction, Distance Educationand Education Systems Development have been some of the core concepts in his research.

PreambleIt is a very warm Sunday morning, the first one in August 2003. The time is approaching10 o’clock and already there are 15,224 persons connected to one of the popular websites for young people. What did they do last night? Before this Sunday ends there will besomething like 300,000 visitors on that site. That is out of a population of only 8,952,605people35. The Net generation is growing up and choosing new ways for interaction. Alsothe population as a whole is maturing in their relationship to the Internet. In Sweden it ismore than three years since half of the population between 12 and 79 years were surfing



35 Statistics Sweden May 31, 2003. www.scb.se/indexeng.asp

www.studymentor.com

www.scb.se/indexeng.asp

on the net36. How many it is today we don’t have valid statistics for, but it is most probablymuch closer to 100 than to 50%. Visiting Sweden, you are in a country where the infra-structure allows a lot of activities using the Internet, and the Swedes are online. The ques-tion then is “Is the Internet used for Online Education”?

The examples given above will be elaborated a little further in a later section. They willall show intense use of the Internet for various purposes, not least in the educational sphere.But the very large expectations concerning the Internet as a carrier for education have notbeen fulfilled – yet. If Online Education is defined as a phenomenon close to DistanceEducation but fully based on the use of the Internet, as it is in this book, we have reachedthat to a very limited extent.

Looking into policy documents on education matters from the Swedish Government onewill find similar visions and goals as in many other Western European countries. Simplified,Sweden wants to be best in the world, as most other countries and in compliance with thevisions presented by the European Union. For more than 50 years the route ahead towardsthose visions has included the use of the latest information technology. The ways of imple-menting policy and introducing technology have varied over the years but successively andslowly the education systems are changing. We have seen no revolutionary changes inthem in this country, but evolution towards more technology supported teaching and learn-ing, education more based on pedagogical theories and a distinct power-shift in the sys-tems. Ambitions to decentralise have moved focus and decisive power from central authori-ties to students, teachers, and local bodies at all educational levels.

This chapter will give a brief overview over these developments in Sweden. Before elab-orating on that, an important comment on the societal context for these changes: Over theyears almost all education in Sweden37 has been a free asset to the citizens. Private institu-tions exist but they are scarce. Thus, this is also the case for adult education. Popular edu-cation at folk high schools and community colleges (municipal adult education) is free ofcharge. That is also the case for tertiary education at universities and university colleges.For personal costs students at all levels can get financial support and favourable loans fromthe state. This situation has of course adapted people’s minds to thinking that education issomething demanding you need to invest time and effort in, but it is nothing you pay for.

I will start this storytelling by giving a few examples from the policy and praxis levels inthe Swedish scenario. In a following section the ideas and directions on the policy levelwill be further elaborated, thereafter a more structured description of how policy has beenimplemented and online education realised. As a last step I will discuss successes andfailures in Swedish online education.



36 Teknisk Framsyn www.tekniskframsyn.nu

37 For an overview of the education systems in Sweden the reader is recommended to go to:■ Basic education www.skolverket.se/english/system/index.shtml■ Tertiary education www.sweden.se/templates/SISCommonPage____4970.asp■ Various forms of adult education www.skolverket.se/english/system/adult.shtml

www.skolverket.se/english/system/index.shtml

www.sweden.se/templates/SISCommonPage____4970.asp

www.skolverket.se/english/system/adult.shtml

www.tekniskframsyn.nu

A Country OnlineBecoming a FrontrunnerAs in other countries investments in information technology have been relatively high overthe decades. The use of radio, television, video, and computers in education and traininghas been investigated and discussed by state commissions one after another, many of themhaving had money to feed into the education systems for development work38. Looking inthe rear mirror one can say that they have tried to solve problems in education and trainingwith a top-down perspective, most of them have tried to push the use of technology. Ofcourse these different initiatives have had effects. They probably prepared the systems forlater changes by making students, parents, teachers, and administrators successively moreaware of the possibilities in technology and as eye-openers for the differences betweendifferent technologies. The expected outcomes of the different initiatives though wereseldom reached. Ambitious goals of dramatic changes in education systems were notfulfilled, e.g. centralised production of televised lectures and similar learning materialproved to be unrealistic in the Swedish context and local innovative projects implementingchanges turned out to give only temporary changes. After the project periods one couldmost often notice a return to old solutions.39 Apart from the increased awareness, anothervery important effect of the decades with committees and development work was of coursethe investments made in technology infrastructure. A large variety of technical equipmentand fast communication networks were successively installed.

A turning point came in the mid 90s. Some of the main factors behind it were

■ very strong demonstration of official policy on the introduction of IT■ setting-up of agents for change supporting development of education systems■ pushes and pulls - more space for local initiatives.

Carl Bildt, who was Prime Minister of Sweden, gave in February 1994 a speech40 settinga new political agenda for the transformation of Sweden into a nation drawing upon theresources of information technology. He formed an IT Commission where he himself waschair and many of the other ministers of his government were delegates. Included in thecommissions were also researchers and representatives of business and industry. The ideawas of course to initiate, promote and get IT-related transformations in all sectors of societyand the main task for the commission was to highlight the possibilities of IT, to identifylimitations and pave the way for the introduction of it.

O N T H E M O V E T O WA R D S O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N I N S W E D E N


38 An early example could be SOU 1973: 19 TRU:s försöksverksamhet 1967–1972. (The Committeefor Television and Radio in Education. Experimental activities 1967–1972. Stockholm: Kommitténför television och radio i utbildningen.

39 Holmberg, C. (1998) På distans. Utbildning, undervisning och lärande. (SOU 1998:83)Stockholm: Nordstedts tryckeri.

40 www.bildt.net/index.asp?artid=354

www.bildt.net/index.asp?artid=354

From 1994 onwards the idea was to invest approximately one billion Swedish crowns(€110 million) per year in research and development work. Up till now, in 2003, thatmost probably also has been the case. All together development programmes, foundations,research schemes, national agencies and authorities, and municipalities have some yearsspent more than that.

Of high importance was the fact that the government itself tried to demonstrate goodpractice, to be a spearhead in the introduction of IT. Already early 1994 the Swedishgovernment together with the White House in the USA was linked to the Internet and anopen information source for the citizens. A more spectacular event was that Carl BildtFebruary 4, 1994, sent the first e-mail ever between heads of government to Bill Clinton.41

By doing that and all the publicity he attracted, over night a large majority of the Swedeslearnt what an e-mail is and knew about its possibilities.

Other traits in the reform processes were the recognition of a power-shift between centralauthorities and local systems. An already started decentralisation process was increased andthe education systems on all levels became highly decentralised. Local context and knowl-edge could be mirrored in educational programmes and organisational solutions. Later on inthe 1990s central authorities were replaced with national bodies working as agents forchange in the education systems. This will be demonstrated in a later section of this chapter.

Online Services, Online Authorities42 43

In line with the discussions in many countries all over the world the Swedish governmenthas stressed the importance of using the new technologies to increase the service level tocitizens.44 In a Government bill 199945 they made it clear that every ministry and centralauthority should serve as a model for the use of information technology in its internal activi-ties as well as in its interplay with business, industry and citizens. The ambition should be tobe available 24 hours as an information source and open to business enterprises. Imple-menting technology for these purposes should not exclude older forms of interactionbetween authorities and citizens; it should be possible to approach the authorities via alarge variety of channels. Pluralism might be the keyword.

The Swedish Agency for Public Management (Statskontoret)46 got the task to stimulateand support the changes towards “24-hour authorities”. In a recent study presented by theagency it reported that the ideas in the government bill have been highly accepted andwork as a driving force towards an increased customer orientation. With few exceptionsthe authorities now are established on the Internet with a growing variety of services.



41 www.bildt.net/index.asp?artid=263

42 http://finans.regeringen.se/fragor/forvaltningspolitik/handlingsprogram/atgarder.htm

43 www.statens-e-forum.nu/artiklar/98.shtml

44 Government bill 1997/98:136


46 www.statskontoret.se/english/index.htm

www.bildt.net/index.asp?artid=263

http://finans.regeringen.se/fragor/forvaltningspolitik/handlingsprogram/atgarder.htm

www.statens-e-forum.nu/artiklar/98.shtml

www.statskontoret.se/english/index.htm

A large part of the population is today relying to a large extent on the Internet for most oftheir interaction with the authorities.

The Net Generation in Action at LunarstormWith the new millennium Lunarstorm also was born. At 00:00 2000 you could surf into itsweb site and from that moment it has grown to be the most frequently visited amongSwedish youth. The person behind the idea, a fellow named Richard Ericsson, from Var-berg, Sweden, had for a long time dreamt of creating a digital meeting-spot welcomingeveryone. His ideas were well received and an early version of the web site started togrow out of control. A group of young people then started a company47 to create,organise and run the work around what became Lunarstorm48. An important aspect wasof course also to get a financially sound platform for the work with the site. Advertising onthe web creates one source of income; another is to sell information gathered from theweb site visitors.

The statistics are impressive. In the age group between 12 to 24 years 80%(1,092,000) have joined as “lunare”. In the same target group, 74% are reached by theyouth-oriented TV channels (i.e. MTV, ZTV), which means that Lunarstorm draws more atten-tion from this age group than the TV medium. Data presented April 2003 shows that eachmember spent more than 40 minutes per day on the web site. The number of unique visitorsper day was 323,553 and of unique visitors for the month was 2,497,11549.

With this success it is of course one of the largest Internet sites in Sweden and definitelythe largest meeting-place for Swedish youth. For more than one million young Swedes itgives a framework for their social network and instead of exchanging telephone numbersor e-mail addresses they give each other their nicknames on Lunarstorm.

A central aspect when building systems for online education is to develop tools forinteraction. Many solutions exist and experiences from them differ. Still, I assume that manyof us working with transformation of the education systems eagerly have been waiting tosee the outburst of intensive interaction on the web. How will the web sites attracting largegroups of people be constructed? How will they be designed? Lunarstorm is not an educa-tional tool but gives the majority of all Swedish students at all levels, a café and a locker-room, a playground and a disco where they discuss everything from moral issues andethics to computer games and the last musical hit. As a “lunare” you are visible on theWeb and can get advice from others on complex matters and be comforted when lifechallenges you. … and if you look into the discussions going on, the instruction and advicethey are giving each other, a lot of it could very well be characterised as teaching andlearning sessions.



47 www.lunarworks.se The company started 1999, main office for Lunarworks is in Varberg, Sweden and the company employs 26 persons.

48 www.lunarstorm.se

49 Källa: TNS/Gallup, Red Measure, april 2003

www.lunarworks.se

www.lunarstorm.se

The American author Don Tapscot introduced the term Net Generation in one of hisbooks50. Among other things he has made forecasts about what will happen with thechildren growing up with digital media. In one chapter he discusses “The Culture ofInteraction” and many of the ideas about the future he has put forward are richlydemonstrated at Lunarstorm. Tapscot writes:

“A new youth culture is emerging … defined as the socially transmitted andshared patterns of behavior, customs, attitudes, and tacit codes, beliefs andvalues, arts, knowledge and social forms. This new culture is rooted in the experi-ence of being young … But most importantly, it is a culture that is stemming fromthe N-Gen use of interactive digital media. We should pay attention because theculture which flows from their experiences in cyberspace foreshadows the culturethey will create as the leaders of tomorrow in workplace and society.” (p 55).

This culture already so well anchored in Swedish society will of course affect people whenthey take on the role of students. The education systems and the different designs the sys-tems will develop for teaching and learning have to take this growing culture into account.It is a new and complex element in the societal context where the education systems andtheir different programmes have to function.

75,000 School Staff Skilled Online UsersThe fourth and last example to demonstrate how Sweden is maturing as a country online willbe taken from the school sector and an extensive programme for further education of teach-ers. The project was called “IT in School” and its acronym was ITiS. It was 1999 - 2002the most massive national investment for development of Swedish schools when the Govern-ment allocated 1.8 billion SEK (approximately € 200 million) for that four-year period.Decades of investments in technology infrastructure and development projects had precededthis project. It was time for the next step. In brief the idea this time was to get the teachers toimplement their pedagogical knowledge and methodological skills in the use of computersand networks.

The basic document behind the project was “Tools for Learning – A National Pro-gramme for ICT in Schools”51 One of the key messages in that was: “The new technologyshould contribute to a new focus on pupils´ learning – the focus should not be on the tech-nology itself”. The ITiS-project was not only aiming to enforce those aspects but also to sup-port change in the schools working and study methods – towards more real life and con-structive tasks, more teamwork between teachers and pupils and more student involvement.Other aims were in general terms a) to prepare teachers and students for the new type ofworking life b) to use IT as a pedagogical tool for change c) to support equality between



50 Tapscott, D. (1998) Growing up digital. The Rise of the Net Generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.

51 Tools for Learning – A National Programme for ICT in Schools. Ministry of Education and Science,Sweden. 1998

schools in the country in the change process d) to change attitudes and promote new ped-agogical approaches e) via IT in school to create new possibilities to interact with societyoutside school and in particular to stimulate international contacts. Very important was also to provide every teacher with a computer – the primary IT working tool52.

From an initial focus on teachers and their development, competence and role, theproject widened the target group to “pedagogical personnel”. The experiences in thebeginning of the project were, that to be effective the project should include more edu-cational professionals with other backgrounds and roles than just teachers. Most importantof course were head teachers.

The initiative involved a wide range of different types of schools at different schoollevels. During the projects “lifetime” the school types involved expanded to also includemunicipal adult education and, during 2002, also folk high schools. The project was trulynational; all 289 municipalities in Sweden participated by applying to be part of the proj-ect. It turned out that more than 50 % of all professionals in Swedish schools participatedand more than 60% of the teachers in the country. Thus more than 75,000 people werevoluntarily and actively involved.

There is agreement between employers and teacher’s unions that teachers’ workinghours are not synonymous with teaching hours. This means it’s possible to organise work inthe school in a variety of different ways. For instance, there may be teachers in a workteam who are not teaching pupils but who are involved in other forms of pedagogicalwork. A full-time teacher has 35 hours of pedagogical work per week in school and 10hours work based in the home. Out of these hours 104 should be used for in-service train-ing per school year. This structure and time resources were necessary for the project andmade it possible to integrate the project in the ordinary work.

Teachers who participated had a computer at their disposal. The computers wereintended to be located in homes, also after the project had been completed. The ideabehind this was that if teachers had their computers at home they would more likely use itas a professional and pedagogical tool. In this way teachers would improve their computerliteracy. The ministry negotiated prices with a number of computer manufacturers and theydelivered computers supplied with pre-installed software all according to local choices(municipalities/teachers). 80% of the computers chosen were portables.

Schools could apply for participation in ITiS with their own local projects and theirorganised local teams of pedagogical staff. Thus the base unit in the project was notindividuals but teams. A support organisation was created in order to co-ordinate activities



52 More elaborated, the goals on a macro level were: Equivalent standards between schools andquality for pupils, School development, Supplementing and reinforcing programmes planned andalready completed by municipalities, Increasing the schools’ access to the Internet and e-mail. Thesewere specified in goals for the Action program:In-service training for 75,000 teachers in teams,A computer for participating teachers, State grants to improve the schools, Access to the Internet, E-mail addresses for all teachers and pupils, Support for developing Swedish and European School-net, Measures for pupils with special needs, Awards for excellent pedagogical contributions.

on national and regional levels and to assist municipalities involved. Facilitators were athand on local levels.

ITiS used a “bottom-up” and “top-down” approach simultaneously. Strong local selfdirection and decision making at school level regarding content and type of local projectscatered for a bottom-up approach. A strong national steering group provided the overallgoals, support structures, the necessary resources and collected and disseminated results.

ITiS has had a very large impact on school systems and it is locally very well known.Many not directly affected by the project are eager to be followers. The increased aware-ness and more skilled usage of IT tools in schools are of course in the long run of highimportance for the whole of society and for preparing teachers and students for differentforms of Web-based learning.

Societal Ambitions and Commercial HopesThe Prosperous Future of E-learningSweden has been no exception to other countries when it comes to expectations concern-ing the e-learning market. If anything, commercial hopes have been higher than in othercountries. A flood of books and articles, and thousands of visionary and missionary meet-ings appeared between 1995 and 2002. The use of IT in education was believed to be areal money-maker. Reports53 giving the market prognoses of the future of e-learning statedthat the market should increase by 27% per year. The commercial value of it was estimatedat 2,5 billion SEK (€ 275 million) by the year 2006 and the largest part of the market wasto be Web-based learning, a concept used as a synonym for online learning.

Entrepreneurs had wide-open ears and very many businesses were started producingLearning Management Systems, online courses, different types of learning material usingthe Web and also large-scale activities combining different media.

Also these expectations, though more elaborate and moderate, influenced the nationalagenda. A long series of documents arriving from the government pledged a more intenseuse of the possibilities the new digital tools were offering.

Government PolicyEducation systems are looked upon as potent instruments in the change processes in society.That is a trait in most Western countries and has been a dominant feature of Swedish societyfor the last 160 years. Governments in Sweden have very actively worked with the agendasfor the education systems. Societal goals should be reached through schooling in educa-tional structures adapted to these goals. During the last few decades expectations concern-ing the systems for adult education have been extremely high from the policy makers.Through flexibility they shall meet needs of people with short educational histories and



53 Swedish Corporate eLearning Market, 2001 – 2006.

compensate them for what they missed during their early years. By cooperating with thework sector they shall adapt the human capital to close the gap between needs and supplyin the labour market. Being a companion throughout life the education systems shall bepresent during an individual’s life cycle providing sources of fast-increasing knowledge,furnish the individual with new tools and explaining the changing conditions in society,creating the possibility of life-long learning.

As they were formed during centuries, education systems are solid constructions and themajority of them are organised to meet other demands than the three dimensions mentionedabove. In the Swedish case decisions have been taken since the 70s pointing in one direc-tion. The different institutions of education shall be successively reconstructed. They shallmove from being suppliers of education in one format to being suppliers of education inmulti-formats. They shall provide students with campus training, distance education andblended learning. When an open university of the British type was discussed in Swedendecisions were taken not to organise such an institution, but to give the traditional universi-ties the task to also supply distance learners. State-financed single-mode institutions (work-ing solely with distance education) on the upper secondary level54 were given new tasksthrough a decision of the Parliament (2001). Instead municipal adult education institutionsare supposed to work with multi-formats; that is, they should cater both for the student physi-cally present and the distant learner who is on line.

Apart from the three goals mentioned above, the expected outcomes of the evolution ofthe systems are to engage 50% of each age group in higher education. This is of coursean advanced goal and demands dramatic changes in education systems. In the year1900, out of each age group 1% (700 students) passed upper secondary level; today theequivalent is 85%. In the year 1960 32,000 students studied at the Swedish universities. Inthe autumn semester 2002 there were 329,000 students at tertiary institutions. That was anincrease of 9% from the year before. Still, the system is far away from delivering the politicalgoals. Present statistics show that 32% of the population have some kind of higher educationand 17% have an education demanding three years or more of university studies.

To reach the ambitious goal of 50% of each age cohort going through higher educa-tion, education systems on all levels have to be organised to suit all kinds of learnersthroughout their whole life cycle. Not only universities and university colleges have to adjustto new ways of working but also upper secondary schools and the different types of institu-tions for adult education.

The Swedish politicians have so far seen educational policies as a national domain.Thus the Swedish attitude has been to – “first develop domestically and then create interna-tional networks and have an international outlook”. Reluctantly the globalisation of educa-tion is acknowledged and the political control of the increasingly international and money-driven Internet-based education could not be ignored. But there are still few signs in policydocuments of a changed agenda in this aspect.



54 Statens Skolor för Vuxna placed in Norrköping founded during the 1950s and Statens Skolor förVuxna placed in Härnösand founded during the 1960s.

The IT- commission already mentioned in the introduction has had as its main task toadvise the government on issues related to IT-policy. It was created in 1994 with nineteendelegates, chaired by the prime minister and six of his other ministers joined the work of thecommission. No one argued the need for an IT policy and in a short time they alsodeveloped one. Three commissions have followed the first one, successively with lessinvolvement of the top politicians. After nine years the last commission ended its work.55

In their last documents you can perceive a certain degree of irritation over the situation. IT,which was a top priority in the mid 90s, now is competing with other policy fields andpresently the idea has been to integrate questions related to IT as a part of other politicalfields. Still the need for political leadership is stressed and clear visions about how toprosper from the possibilities inherent in information technology at large. The commissionargues that we are in the beginning of an era with large changes. Technology has thematurity to support these changes but further political initiatives are needed.

The relevance of IT in the education sector has been discussed during the past nineyears. In their last series of advice to the government they underline that IT is not just a toolfor increased access to education and for introducing new forms of interaction. The use ofIT in education puts demands on new policies in relation to production and distribution oflearning material. In that way the commission begs for increased support for online educa-tion. The rapid development of the technologies and the integration of them in all societalsectors could create a competence crisis. Presently there are not enough skilled peopleavailable to cater for this development. Thus another strong piece of advice to the govern-ment was to further invest on all education levels in educational programmes covering avariety of aspects of IT.

Another commission with a great impact on the development of online learning workedduring the end of the 90s. It was given the task to enlighten distance education methods foradult education. During the beginning of the 2000s a series of other commissions dealtwith for example recruitment, new conditions for learning, pluralism and questions aroundthe openness of education systems, primarily at tertiary level.

The Minister of Education and Science appointed the Commission on Distance Methodswithin Education56 during 1995 with the task of outlining strategies for distance educationpolicy57. The task involved all systems for adult education and was also to take intoaccount possible alterations in the role of the Educational Broadcasting Company. Thework within the Commission was heavily based on empirical data and therefore it hadlarge financial resources. The use of IT was to be a paramount issue in the work. The



55 All reports from the four commissions can be found at (many of them are produced both in Swedishand English):www.itkommissionen.se/dynamaster/file_archive/030306/6ab139523a910d750c54fd7473b609a8/Total%20rapportlista%20030109.doc

56 DUKOM, Distansutbildningskommittén (U95:07): Strategi för distansutbildning

57 Dir 1995:69, Directives of a Commission: Distance Methods within Education. Decision at Cabinetmeeting May 4th 1995. Swedish Ministry of Education and Science.

www.itkommissionen.se/dynamaster/file_archive/030306/6ab139523a910d750c54fd7473b609a8/Total%20rapportlista%20030109.doc

Commission launched 100 development projects spread over different levels in the educa-tional systems and over the whole country. The projects tested different forms of teachingand different ways of organizing learning, ways of implementing new educational tools,clashes if any between regulations in traditional educational systems and distance educa-tion, etc. The Commission reported58 to the Minister in June 1998. The major suggestionby the Commission was to set up a new co-ordinating body for distance education, theSwedish Agency for Distance Education. That institution was to have resources to sponsordevelopment work and research. It was to organise a national web site with tools forDistance Teaching and Distance Studies. It was also to inform about research in the field ofdistance education.

The many commissions dealing with different aspects of higher education in the newcentury resulted in a government bill to the parliament. Directly translated from Swedish thetitle was The Opening of Higher Education but the formal document in English is calledReforms in Higher Education – a more open system59. It was really an important documentincluding not just major reforms of higher education but also as a consequence drawing upa new agenda for other sectors of adult education. Some of the proposals were of highimportance for this presentation of Swedish policy. They were all accepted by the parlia-ment.

The major idea was that distance learning via the webs of universities and universitycolleges should be coordinated into a Swedish Net University. The ambition behind thatwas to widen access to higher education and to encourage lifelong learning. All providersof education at tertiary level who were legally authorised to issue degrees could take partin the activity. A new authority was to support and promote the activities, The Agency forThe Swedish Net University60. The Net University with the Internet as the major means ofdistributing academic courses started during 2002.

On the same occasion the decision was made to close the Swedish Agency forDistance Education (Distum), which meant it had been in action barely three years. Theresponsibilities of Distum were to support change in the organisation of education and inteaching and learning in popular education and in higher education. The decision to estab-lish a Net university moved some of the responsibilities of Distum to the universities them-selves and to the new agency. For all adult education systems apart from higher educationthe parliament decided to set up a new authority, the Swedish Agency for FlexibleLearning61.

The major task for the Swedish Agency for Flexible Learning (CFL) became to promotethe development and utilisation of flexible learning in municipal adult education and liberaladult education (folk high schools, study associations). Apart from serving the systems for



58 Distansutbildningskommitteen. Flexibel utbildning på distans (SOU 1998:84)


60 www.netuniversity.se/Default.asp?c=63

61 www.cfl.se

www.netuniversity.se/Default.asp?c=63

www.cfl.se

formal adult education it thus covers what in Sweden is called «folkbildning», which is thepopular non-formal and voluntary educational system for all ages. There are eleven differ-ent study associations, which conduct around 350,000 study circles every year, withabout three million participants altogether. They also arrange more than 200,000 culturalevents with about 15 million participants or visitors. There are 147 folk high schools scat-tered around the country. Each semester they have around 100,000 participants in shortcourses. In formal adult education there were in 2002 332.000 students.

Other Policy Making Bodies and Their PoliciesSeveral other organisations have been active as policy makers in the field of online learn-ing. To briefly describe just a few therefore is complicated and the selection has to be avery personal one. Of course one could mention some of the large magazines62 and news-papers63 or forums for debate, but my selection includes just three of the important playerswho have had a more direct possibility to both formulate and implement policy.

The Knowledge FoundationAs one of the consequences of the more active policy-making during the mid 90s, founda-tions were organised as governmental initiatives, all with aims connected to informationtechnology introduction in various fields of society. One with tasks close to the theme of thisbook is the Knowledge Foundation64. The Knowledge Foundation was established in1994. The foundation promotes broad use of IT in society, and supports research atSweden’s university colleges and new universities. As one of their tools they supportexchange of knowledge between universities, other institutes of higher education, industrialresearch institutes and the business community. Documents from the foundation state thattheir challenge at the beginning of the 21st century can be summarised in one concept:Upgrade Sweden. The foundation had a starting capital of 3.6 billion SEK (approximately€ 400 million) and it has been very successful in handling the capital, so in spite of verylarge investments in development projects and research programmes, most of the startingcapital is left as a basis for future activities. One of the very important lines of action hasbeen to promote opportunities for school pupils to get to grips with the new informationtechnology. One billion SEK was spent on 27 very large lighthouse projects in schools andto facilitate the spread of information technology on a broad base. One of the themes wasto find new ways of thinking about how pupils learn that reduce the dependence on teach-ers, increase pupils’ commitment and get them really involved in the learning process.There were four major elements in this large investment in school development. A variety ofschool development projects, Investment in teaching aids, Research programmes into learn-ing and IT, and Information campaigns to ensure that other schools benefited from the expe-rience and results gained. Having a possibility to invest all this money of course had a



62 http://computersweden.idg.se

63 www.idg.se

64 www.kks.se/aboutus/

http://computersweden.idg.se

www.idg.se

www.kks.se/aboutus/

large impact in schools and on the attitudes of students, teachers and parents. The Know-ledge Foundation summarises some of the experiences and effects in the following bulletpoints:

■ Pupils at project schools are more involved than in the past – they own the learningprocess.

■ Endeavours to create pupil-owned learning and the right tools have resulted in a newconcept: learning to learn.

■ Schools must have an ongoing educational discussion on the skills and tools that pupilsneed.

■ Schools use IT more selectively.■ The technical approach of the mid-1990s has disappeared – the spotlight is now on

learning.■ The gap in IT skills is narrowing between schools.■ The Knowledge Foundation showed that it is possible to push ahead, to use new and

unconventional methods – even in schools.■ Enthusiasts were easy to find and bring on board, and it was these people who came

to dominate the school projects.■ The projects highlighted the importance of the head teacher – if the head teacher drops

out, then the entire school drops out too.

IT-FöretagenIT-Företagen65 is a top organisation for IT companies and its main task is to assist anddevelop that industry. Swedish IT industry has for years been a dominant factor in the econ-omy of the country spearheaded by Ericsson66. The association has an important role toserve as a forum, lobby decision-makers and to help develop the industry as a whole.Visibility of the industry, promoting positive attitudes and adapting education systems to thevarious needs of the IT industry have of course been of high importance. Together with theConfederation of Swedish Enterprises67 they have run massive information campaignsaround IT professions, IT use and the like directed towards Swedish youth. The priorities forthe Confederation are spelled out in the following way

■ To promote continued infrastructure initiatives which give users in Sweden access toefficient and stable communication networks and create solid conditions for developingand using IT and communication services,

■ To promote applicable legislation which is predictable and facilitating competition onequal terms,



65 www.itforetagen.se

66 www.ericsson.com

67 www.svensktnaringsliv.se/index_english.asp

www.itforetagen.se

www.ericsson.com

www.svensktnaringsliv.se/index_english.asp

■ To promote increased skills for users and an expansion of the use of IT and electroniccommunication services,

■ To promote Sweden maintaining its position as leading IT nation and a leading nationas regards new advanced services, and

■ To promote IT and electronic infrastructure being used to secure sustainable socialdevelopment and solid growth in Sweden.

It is easy to realise that these two organisations, if they are successful when they worktowards these goals, will also have an important societal effect.

Teknisk framsynThe third and last example of policy producers outside the traditional political sphere iscalled “Teknisk framsyn”68 which could be translated into “The Far-sighted Role of Techno-logy” but also “The Technological Outlook”. The resources to realise this were put up as ajoint effort by a group of stakeholders69 with an organisation, also with responsibilities insupporting societal change in relation to new technologies, called VINNOVA as the coor-dinator. “Teknisk framsyn” is a national project aiming at drawing up a future scenario forthe technological development. The perspectives are long-term visions and to promote theinterplay between technology and organisational and social processes. Presently they areworking with questions like: What are the guiding principles behind people’s choice oftechnology? and What are the driving forces when large shifts in technology use appear?“Teknisk framsyn” influences decision makers mainly at national level by publishing theirwork and through inviting people to seminars.

What Has Become of All the Initiatives?

Mechanisms to Realise PolicyPolicy production has been intense in Sweden; that must be quite clear after the presenta-tion above. A few other things are probably also obvious; the investment of money hasbeen extensive, development projects have played important roles and agents have beenset up to ease the implementation of policies. In this section the results of these initiativeswill be further elaborated.



68 www.tekniskframsyn.nu.

69 The earlier mentioned Knowledge Foundation and IT-företagen, but also IVA(www.iva.se/eng/index.asp), The Swedish Research Council (www.vr.se/english/index.asp), SwedishBusiness Development Agency (www.nutek.se/sb/d/112), Confederation of Swedish Enterprises(www.svensktnaringsliv.se/index_english.asp) and The Swedish Trade Union Confederation(www.lo.se/english/index.htm).

www.tekniskframsyn.nu

www.vr.se/english/index.asp

www.lo.se/english/index.htm

www.iva.se/eng/index.asp

www.nutek.se/sb/d/112

www.svensktnaringsliv.se/index_english.asp

www.iva.se/

The Commercial InitiativesThe number of entrepreneurs who started different businesses was large and they had nodifficulty in finding people interested in investing money in a variety of projects. One firmafter another was born; they started businesses with the major focus of exploiting the pos-sibilities of the new technologies in education. Few of them are today still in the market.Using their names when searching the Web you will find four to five-year-old articlesdescribing grand openings, but also newer articles reporting big losses and closing downof business.

K-WorldOne of the more spectacular companies was K-World. The name should be translated into“a world of knowledge”. The background for K-World was typical for the era of the earlye-learning companies. The founders very much looked into the situation in the U.S. wherethey saw large investments going into e-learning. Furthermore they believed that the e-learning companies would cover 40% of all of the education market in the year 2003in Sweden. As the reader easily can realise from the following information, K-Worldsucceeded in raising very large funds for its activities and also created alliances with otherimportant players within Sweden.

K-World was founded in 1998. The company consisted of a learning solutions depart-ment, a television channel and a website (kworld.se). The website was launched onOctober 31st, 1999, along with the television channel. They presented themselves in thefollowing way:

kworld.se is an intelligent market place for people who want to learn more. Thetraining and education market (kunskapsmarknaden) provides access to over4500 training courses from 160 education companies. The market place is sup-ported by an inspiring editorial section that gives the visitor guidelines and motiva-tion to study. This also includes free mini-courses that cover a wide range of sub-jects. The Company has a TV channel and on kworld.se extra material andmini-courses related to the TV-programs are found. kworld.se has received moreactive users than expected. In February the site had more than 30 000 visits andthe number of members today exceeds 3000. The training and education marketconsists of more than 4500 courses and several companies are waiting to enter.

K-World had the ambition to start a “knowledge revolution”, first in Sweden then movinginto the rest of Europe. They foresaw an enormous growth in the need for higher educationand of further education in different professions. K-World would respond to that need. Theyplanned to have both individuals and business and industry as customers. At the same timeK-World had ambitions to be an important player in the field of liberal adult education. Ofcourse these assumptions about a knowledge revolution were correct. The Swedish govern-ment had deliberated about that since the 70s and successively constructed educationsystems to meet those plans.



All kinds of teaching and learning were to be included in the two major ways for distri-bution and communication: the TV-channel and the Web portal. The TV-channel would alsoattract students and function as an opener to other activities. The company produced somelearning material themselves but also bought from abroad. They also formed alliances withinternational players. Still they had an enormous task to fulfil supporting needs of a largevariety of target groups in very different education systems and with staff with limited experi-ences from more than the 100 years of trials in distance education or from the relevantfields of research. The complexity of the education task was probably not fully realised.

The initiative did not just attract funds and co-players but was also very successful in attract-ing a lot of press. In March 2002 one could read that K-World had ceased broadcasting onSweden’s digital terrestrial TV and shortly thereafter the whole activity was closed.

This story could be repeated. Between 1997 and 2002 many ventures started andended facing similar problems as K-World. Some of them had plans and activities largerthan K-World but K-World was probably the most expensive experience for the Swedishe-learning market.

Formal and Informal Adult EducationDuring the major part of the 20th century, adult education, in various forms, played animportant role in the Swedish education system. Folk high schools and study associationsactually have an even older origin and so has distance education. Up to the end of the60s, a small number of large correspondence schools were among the most vital playerson this scene. Around the middle of the 60s, Sweden probably had the largest number ofdistant students in proportion to its total number of inhabitants.

However, in the late 60s, through a parliamentary Act, practically all forms of adult edu-cation in Sweden were made free of charge or highly subsidised. Adult education colleges(Municipal Adult Education) were set up all over the country. They added to the earliereducation systems for popular education possibilities for adults to get formal education atsecondary and upper secondary level. The correspondence schools found it very hard tomeet the competition and either went out of business or had very limited activities.

As another and earlier initiative on the secondary and upper secondary levels, twoNational Institutes for distance education were founded: The first one in 1957 placed inthe southern part of Sweden and then a second one in the North approximately ten yearslater70. Both were single-mode institutions producing and giving courses solely as distanceeducation. For more than forty years they worked in the field of distance education buildingup experience of distance teaching, distance learning and of the complex organisationaround this way of performing education. This was of course a very important asset whenthe government wanted to realise their policies around flexible learning.

Presently the task for the different adult education institutions is to adapt their ways ofworking to suit the students better. Their old ways of working should be combined with newones into a variety of study forms. Traditional classroom teaching has its given place but



70 Statens Skolor för Vuxna in Norrköping (SSVN) and in Härnösand (SSVH).

computers and networks should be used to increase access, quality and flexibility in theorganisational solutions; in the Swedish case that could be translated into flexible learning.The experiences from the distance education field are of high importance in this transactionprocess. Over the years distance education has been a laboratory or site for field experi-ments in innovation in education; online learning, e-learning, and Web-based learningcould be developed on that basis.

The two national institutions thus got a new role as supporters in the change processes.They form the core of a new agency founded January 2002, the Swedish Agency forFlexible Learning (CFL). The agency shall work as an agent for change and supportMunicipal Adult Education and the various forms of liberal adult education when movingtowards more flexible forms including online learning. The major tools for that are to

■ support projects,■ develop and disseminate knowledge on methods and ways of working in flexible learning,■ provide further training for teachers and administrators,■ provide information on Internet-based software,■ act as a networked information agency for IT-supported distance education, and■ monitor and provide information on research and development work relating to dis-

tance education and flexible learning.

The range of activities has widened and CFL today also supports setting-up of learningcentres71 and has responsibilities to develop methods and systems for validation ofstudents' de facto competence and informal learning.

The National Broadcasting Company got a special assignment to arrange distanceeducation courses for popular education. It had been active with the production of educa-tional programs since the 40s72 and this was added to their earlier tasks. An EducationalBroadcasting Company was founded.

Higher Education and Governmental Distance Education InitiativesWhen in many other countries open universities were created, Sweden chose not to build asingle-mode institution for distance education73. Instead an extremely decentralised system



71 A Learning Centre is a meeting place where adult students can find support and resources for their studies.

72 The Educational Broadcasting Company (UR) is producing and delivering courses on different educationallevels often in co-operation with one of the old correspondence schools and with a group of universities. URis mainly using traditional designs and techniques for DE but still it is on the whole an advanced player inthe field of DE when it comes to arrangements for the teaching and learning situations. However, during1998 it was suggested to give UR new tasks mainly as producers of teaching material for the different DEinstitutions.

73 Mainly in different Commissions i.e.: SOU 1971:36 Produktionsresurser för TV och radio iutbildningen. Stockholm: Esselte tryck., SOU 1973:19 TRU:s försöksverksamhet 1967-1972.Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. and SOU 1975:72 Distansundervisning. Lägesbeskrivning samtorganisatoriska alternativ för högskolan. Stockholm: LiberFörlag Allmänna Förlaget.

was set up for the tertiary level. The responsibility for carrying out distance education restedwith the individual university departments, which at the same time organised traditionalforms of university education. Thus a dual-mode system was created.

Those decisions during the 70s about the tertiary level led to a markedly small-scaletype of distance education with, as a rule, a maximum of 30 students in each course. Inthe beginning of the 90s approx. 800 courses were arranged, labelled «distance educa-tion courses» at Swedish universities. A majority of those courses however had either nodistance education at all or were courses with just few distance education elements. Theywere often a combination of pure self-study and compressed face-to-face lectures, mostoften at weekends. When they applied distance education methods, that could be a studyguide and a few contacts at a distance via post/fax and/or telephone.

No doubt, this confusion was - to a great extent - due to the extremely decentralised andsmall-scale organisation of distance education at Swedish universities. Small changes overthe years were shown74 and the state of the art was not at all up to the standards expectedby the authorities.

The academic year 1994/95 the number of students following distance educationcourses was 25,800 which was an increase of 60% over a couple of years75. It wasapproximately 10% of the student population.

During the 70s, 80s and 90s the ambitions of the government were to increase dis-tance education. That has successively moved over to include different educational formatsusing computers and the Internet. In the light of history the actions taken for improving thatfield can be described as four steps, each of which was a trial of alternative strategies.

Umeå UniversityIn the late 80s the government made a first large-scale attempt by concentrating funds andefforts on a development programme at Umeå University. The overarching purpose was tocontribute to rural development in the northern sparsely populated areas of the country. Bydeveloping expertise in distance education Umeå University could be the main actor in thefield and a front-runner having followers at other universities. A mild description of the out-come could be that those ambitions were not fulfilled.

The University ConsortiaA second step was taken by the government through making resources available to stimu-late co-operation between universities. By gathering expertise from different institutionalbodies and bringing a diversity of stakeholder perspectives together, new and more potentorganisers of distance education could grow. This brought about the establishment of anumber of university consortia with the purpose of developing distance education in joint



74 Holmberg, C. (1994). Reflexioner kring distansutbildning och pedagogik i Individanpassning, tillgäng-lighet, flexibilitet. Rapport från en distanslärarkonferens i Umeå 6-7 juni 1994. Umeå: Umeå universitet,Distansutbildning i utveckling, Rapport nr 10.

75 Data om informationstekniken i Sverige 1996. Stockholm, Statistiska centralbyrån, 1996.

projects. Co-operation between autonomous institutions at tertiary level is known worldwideas a difficult task. Apart from demonstrating that, the consortia had difficulties in buildingthe necessary fundament of knowledge to be efficient producers and deliverers of distanceeducation.

Dukom and DistumA third step was taken through forming the Commission on Distance Methods within Educa-tion. The Minister of Education appointed the Commission during 1995 with the assign-ment to outline strategies for distance education policy76, which have been described inearlier sections of this chapter.

The major suggestion by the Commission was to set up a new co-ordinating body fordistance education. That institution should have resources to sponsor development workand research. It was to organise a national web site with tools for Distance Teaching andDistance Studies. It was also to inform about research in the field of distance education.

On 1 July 1999 the Swedish Agency for Distance Education (Distum) commenced itsoperations77 in Härnösand in the north of Sweden. The agency would promote the devel-opment and application of distance education based on information and communicationtechnologies (ICT-based distance education). The operations would encompass universi-ties/colleges and popular public education throughout the country.

The major strategy of Distum was to support the development of new knowledge aboutflexible education at a distance and to disseminate that knowledge to universities and otherbodies for adult education. Research and testing of ideas in practice were important toolsfor Distum. The hypothesis was that with a sound base of new knowledge the educationalorganisations would make decisions about revised forms for arranging education.

In March 2002 the Ministry of Education and Science closed Distum. A little more than2.5 years was of course too short a time to test all basic ideas behind Distum’s role as anagent for change. Many different factors were influencing the decision from the Ministry.One important aspect was that the organisation found it hard to gain credibility among theinstitutions for higher education.

NätuniversitetetThe fourth route towards a more pluralistic way of teaching and learning at the universitieshas been tested since 2002. The government decided to set up the Swedish Net Universityas a dual- or multi-modal university based upon the courses and programmes already givenby the universities and university colleges. Participation in the Net University is voluntaryand the ownership of it is very clear. It belongs to the universities and university collegesdelivering courses into it. In order to support the project, the Swedish Net UniversityAgency was set up. The primary task of the agency is to co-ordinate the different courses



76 Dir 1995:69, Directives of a Commission: Distance Methods within Education. Decision at Cabinetmeeting May 4th 1995. Swedish Ministry of Education and Science.

77 Excerpts from the Ordinance with instructions for the Swedish Agency for Distance Education (SFS1999:249)

given by the various Swedish universities and for that purpose run a web site78 exposingthe courses. The agency will also support improvements in skills and competence amongdistance education teachers and other personnel and identify topics and areas that wouldbenefit from more distance education.

Thus a lot of the initiatives in this fourth step of promoting distance education and its fol-lowers have moved back to the institutional level. That together with seed money is the driv-ing force in this case. During the first years of existence each student taking courses via theNet University will give a much higher return to the university than students following on-campus courses. For the two first years 371 million SEK (€ 41 million) has been spent forthis purpose.

So far no dramatic results can be reported. Still approximately 10% of the student popu-lation is following distance education courses. The quality of the courses provided and thedegree of flexibility they give to students have not yet been analysed.

Still Waiting for Online Learning

QuestionsTrying to answer questions like “How come online education is not a more dominating traitin our country?” or “What went wrong with all investments and hopes for the future?” is notsimple. A variety of aspects have influenced developments to where we are today. On thepositive side all work so far has created a very good climate for future development ofonline learning, on the negative side there has been and still is a lack of understanding ofthe complexity of the change processes needed to support these new forms of teachingand learning.

A Promising FutureThe situation early autumn 2003 in Sweden is that many of the prerequisites for onlinelearning are present. We definitely have a growing digital generation. Not just are grow-ing numbers of youth competent users of the net and computers, but also a very large por-tion of those who have had to enter the digital world as grown ups. If there were measuresof digital maturity, Sweden as a country would score high. The technology infrastructure istherefore also advanced. Already some statistical notes on this have been described. InJanuary 2002 Eurostat presented the following status: 90% of Swedish households withchildren in school have computers, and 70 % of all Swedish households have at least onecomputer – and a majority of these are connected to the Internet. Of course these numbershave increased since then. More and more one also finds a supporting infrastructure forindividuals using the Net as a tool for learning. Libraries are normally well equipped withcomputers and Internet access and with staff with a growing knowledge and interest inlearner support. In connection with libraries or as autonomous units, learning centres or



78 www.netuniversity.se/Default.asp?c=63

www.netuniversity.se/Default.asp?c=63

study centres are being developed all over Sweden. They are of course also of highimportance to a student studying online.

The ObstaclesMaturity and infrastructure are thus at hand, but still something is missing for online learningto take off. One aspect is money or more correctly the willingness to pay for education.Swedes are not used to paying for education. It is looked upon as a free asset. An impor-tant source of income in the U.S. is tuition fees. The universities in Sweden are not allowedto receive payment from students for the provision of higher education. Tertiary education inSweden is financed by public means. The incentive for Swedish universities to go onlineand educate foreign students for free is thus very limited. Therefore Swedish universitieshave not been active in the international Internet-based education business. On the otherhand in the Swedish context it is hard for international competitors to compete because thenational system offers the services for free and it also provides higher education in thenative language, Swedish. International competition to recruit students has in Sweden there-fore been very low or non-existent in comparison with the situation between the Anglo-Saxon (US, UK, Australia and Canada) global players on other markets. Formal and non-formal adult education has the same situation. Rarely do students have to pay for theireducation.

As introduced earlier, education has become a highly focused area. It is a hot topic inEuropean and national policies. Different kinds of professionals are attracted to education,carrying with them values and beliefs established in other fields, but perhaps not suitablefor building education systems or creating milieus for studies. Of course it is a positive thingthat all these professionals enter the field of education. They bring with them fresh eyes,new viewpoints and can fertilise the field. The negative thing is that people moving into thefield are lacking in knowledge about the “wheels invented before”. Academia is spe-cialised in referring to earlier work; strangely enough this is not the case when they startprojects in ICT and learning. They are of course less knowledgeable about educationalconcepts: systemic mechanisms and established theory related to the development ofeducation systems. Often they see education as a simplistic problem when it de facto is acomplex social phenomenon; they lack holistic views and historical perspectives. Themanagements of education institutions could address this issue by adding “educationsystem experts” to their management teams.

Also many of the attempts to develop and commercially introduce online learning havehad problems related to lack of competence. In most cases the companies have been wellprepared for business with financial and marketing staff. They have had advanced techno-logical skills, often with young employees being in the frontline when using the possibilitiesof digital equipment. The “education system expert”, the specialist in adult learning, andpeople with knowledge of the growing research around distance education and onlinelearning have seldom been present in the project teams. Thus large investments have beenmade in business structure and in technology but too little or often almost nothing in adapt-ing the “products” to the education market. Many of the now sleeping companies built their



commercial ideas on old pedagogy they themselves experienced at school, just imple-mented on the Net or on a CD. Limited knowledge of target groups and how they live andlearn has been an obstacle and often made projects go bankrupt.

A more profound aspect of the change processes discussed here is of course the under-standing of and the compliance with policies developed on the national level. The simplelogic behind presenting “a good idea” and having people living in accordance with it isnot always there. In a study79 the focus was to describe and analyse if and how universi-ties/university colleges had developed policies for their distance education. Thus the coreissue in the study was to what extent the ideas and initiatives from the government and fromcentral authorities were reflected in policy documents at the institutions for higher educationin Sweden. The presence and the content of such local policies were to be analysed. Theresults were not very positive. The central bodies of the universities delivered documentssometimes rather immature in the thinking demonstrated around distance education/flexibleeducation: often they had nothing to deliver. Local policies had not yet been developed.Of course there are many distance education courses given by universities without a formalpolicy. Individuals or departments act according to individual or departmental policy. Aquestion around that could be raised: Is that a sustainable way towards flexible education?

The decentralised education systems we have in Sweden more or less presuppose thatthe development of the system is initiated and realised locally. As demonstrated in thesurvey, few of the institutions had listened to the voice of the government and acted accord-ingly. The academic leaders were guided in other directions and thought about other thingsthan the politicians. Individual teachers and researchers in those institutions out of their owninterest or in compliance with national policy were developing and giving educationsupported by ICT and with flexible formats for the students. Without a local policy frame-work supporting their efforts, their work in this area could be a brief exercise. The conflictsif any between university autonomy and those needs in society best fulfilled by universities,are issues that must be addressed.

The dominant values within academia direct activities towards excellence. This isembedded in the system at all levels. Success means to recruit elite students, the bestresearchers and to be visible in the Nobel Prize Committee. The connection between thesevalues and caring for societal goals is not direct. To compensate people for lack of educa-tion, to upgrade the labour force and to cater for lifelong learning belongs to another worldof values than the striving for excellence. Nothing says that activities aiming at fulfilling oneset of values cannot be realised in the same system as activities fulfilling another set ofvalues, but this must be brought out into the open and discussed.



79 Holmberg, C. & Hansson, H (2002) ICT policies – university leaders versus politicians. Presence andimpact on 49 Swedish institutions for higher education. Paper to ONLINE EDUCA, Berlin, November27 – 29, 2002.

Anecdote 7. The SwedishChallenges: A ProvocativeStatement

The following statement80 is a transcript of my presentation atthe final panel discussion at the Netlearning2002 conference(www.netlearning2002.org) in Ronneby, Sweden. It is apersonal, political statement from a foreigner who intended tostir discussion among the 200-300 Swedes in the audience.

“The most important trend in online education today is thetransition from small-scale experimental courses to large-scale,mainstream operation. I like to call this the online education

mega trend. Only in Scandinavia, we are talking about hundreds of thousands of onlineeducation users. My own institution, NKI Fjernundervisning (www.nki.no), alone offers 400different online courses.

Our challenge is therefore to find effective ways to organize large-scale online edu-cation. And this is a huge challenge for educational institutions. We are facing a period ofimportant organizational development and change. So far, too little focus has been givento this issue.

Another consequence of large-scale online education is that we need to focus on cost-effectiveness. Today the real cost of online education is far too high. We can simply notafford to pay two or three times more for online courses than we pay for on-campuscourses.

Since I am a Norwegian who observes Sweden from abroad, I would like to addresstwo issues, which I perceive as the Swedish challenges:

The first Swedish challenge has to do with cost-effectiveness. In Norway, online studentstypically pay € 4,000 for the equivalent of one-year full-time study. In comparison,Swedish universities receive about € 12,000 in governmental funds for this. Three timesmore than they do for on-campus students. This lavish funding is intended to increase thedevelopment of online courses, but it could easily set a standard for the future cost of onlineeducation courses. In my opinion, the Swedish approach is unwise, not cost-effective, andit could set an unhealthy standard for future overspending.

The second Swedish challenge has to do with tuition fees. In most countries, there isincreasing acceptance of commercialization of education. Swedish universities are still notallowed to charge tuition fees from individual students. Norwegian universities and col-leges are now allowed to charge tuition fees for further and continuing education. This hasmade it the most dynamic and innovative sector of education in Norway. Since Sweden


80 The statement is available as an audio file at www.studymentor.com

www.netlearning2002.org

www.nki.no

www.studymentor.com

lacks this economic incentive for change, Sweden will have significant problems competingwith other countries in the emerging global online education market.

Therefore, I would like to use this opportunity to give a personal piece of advice to theSwedish Ministry of Education and to Nätuniversitetet. As I see it, online education inSweden is far from cost-effective. And it is not sustainable. I predict that most of the onlinecourses that have received financial support from Nätuniversitetet will not be offered againwhen the lavish, external funding stops a few years from now. When that happens, anothereconomic incentive should be in place. And I am convinced that Sweden, like the rest ofthe world, must realize that the solution is to accept that students pay tuition fees for furtherand continuing courses that are taught online.”

PostscriptSince I made this statement, I have discussed the Swedish challenges with a number ofSwedes that have strong opinions about some of my provocative statements. Many dis-agree with me, but some have lamented that Swedish taxpayers finance online courses forforeign students living abroad. Others argued that taxpayers should not pay further educa-tion for doctors, lawyers, and engineers who already have received the lion’s share of freeeducation.

In Norway, there are many who prefer the Swedish model, and there has been a dis-cussion in the Norwegian media81 about student payment for online education. A numberof articles argue against tuition fees for online education.


81 Some articles about tuition fees for online education are available in Norwegian at the followingaddresses:

■ Lover kamp mot studieavgiftene: www.aftenposten.no/jobb/article.jhtml?articleID=469520

■ Nettstudenter må punge ut: www.aftenposten.no/jobb/article.jhtml?articleID=469518

■ ...men i Sverige er det gratis: www.dagbladet.no/kunnskap/2002/05/07/329446.html

■ 30000 for grunnfag via nettet: www.dagbladet.no/kunnskap/2002/05/07/329423.html

■ Nettstudenter må punge ut: http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/5HQUQL

■ Utdanning er viktig - men hvem skal betale? http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/5G2HF5

■ Universitetet i Tromsø tar betalt for grunnstudier http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/5G4EAR

■ Få gratis etterutdanning fra de andre nordiske landene http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/57XLX2

www.aftenposten.no/jobb/article.jhtml?articleID=469520

www.aftenposten.no/jobb/article.jhtml?articleID=469518

www.dagbladet.no/kunnskap/2002/05/07/329446.html

www.dagbladet.no/kunnskap/2002/05/07/329423.html

http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/5HQUQL

http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/5G2HF5

http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/5G4EAR

http://universitet.no/n.nsf/alt/57XLX2

Online Education SupportSystems in Scandinavianand Australian Universities:A Comparative StudyI first understood the cultural gap between Australian and Scandinavian educators when I visitedAustralia with a group of Scandinavian educators. One evening we went to a restaurant to experi-ence local dishes of kangaroo and crocodile meat. There, we had to wait in the bar until a tablewas available. We ordered and paid for one drink each, but didn’t realize it was happy hourbefore we all had drinks in both hands. The table was soon ready, the drinks hurriedly finished,and our spirits rose rapidly. The next day we met with a zealous international relations officer at anAustralian university who proposed to establish a collaborative master’s degree, allowing studentsto spend one year in Scandinavia and one year in Australia. His scheme included offeringstudents two master’s degrees, one from Scandinavia and one from Australia. Then, I immediatelyrealized that I wanted to retire in Australia and establish a company with the slogan Happy HourUniversity: Get two degrees for the price of one.

AbstractThis article82 presents a comparative study of online education support systems in Norwe-gian, Swedish, and Australian universities. The online education support systems discussedcomprise content creation tools and systems for learning management, student manage-ment, and accounting. The author arrives at the conclusion that there seems to be a generallack of integration between these systems in all three countries. Further, there seems to belittle focus on standards specifications such as IMS Global Learning Consortium (IMS) andSharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM) in higher education in all three coun-tries. It was found that both Norway and Sweden value the importance of nationally devel-oped LMS systems and student management systems; however, this does not seem to bethe case in Australia. There also seems to be much more national coordination and



82 This article is based on the article Online Education Systems in Scandinavian and Australian Universities:A Comparative Study. Originally published in the International Review on Research in Open and Dis-tance Learning (IRRODL), Volume 3, Number 2, October 2002. Online at: http://www.irrodl.org/content/v3.2/paulsen.html Copyright (c) 2002.Reproduced with permission of Athabasca University –Canada’s Open University.”

www.studymentor.com

http://www.irrodl.org/content/v3.2/paulsen.html




governmental coercion concerning the choice of student management systems used inSweden and Norway, than is the case in Australia. Finally, with regard to online educa-tion, the most striking difference between these three countries is that of economic policy.In Australia, education is considered an important export industry. In Norway and Sweden,however, export of education does not seem to be an issue for public discussion.

IntroductionThis article was conceived in January 2002 during a two-week study tour of eight Aus-tralian universities in Queensland and New South Wales. It was later nurtured and devel-oped further through literature studies, in-depth telephone interviews, and e-mail correspon-dence with representatives from the universities and a number of other contacts. Ofparticular importance, was the e-mail contact with National Council on Open andDistance Education (NCODE) - Flexible Learning Australasia (http://ncode.mq.edu.au),which helped me collect systems information from all Australian universities.

The Universities visited during the study tour were:

■ University of Southern Queensland (USQ), Toowoomba, www.usq.edu.au■ University of Queensland (UQ), www.uq.edu.au■ Central Queensland University (CQU), www.cqu.edu.au■ Griffith University (GU), Logan Campus, www.gu.edu.au■ Charles Sturt University (CSU), www.csu.edu.au■ University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), www.uts.edu.au■ University of Wollongong (UW), www.uow.edu.au■ James Cook University (JCU), Cairnes Campus, www.jcu.edu.au

Thirty representatives from Norwegian and thirteen representatives from Swedish universitiesparticipated in this traveling seminar, and much time was spent discussing and reflectingupon differences and similarities between Norway’s, Sweden’s, and Australia’s nationaleducational systems. Many participants provided valuable input to this article both duringand after the traveling seminar. The seminar was arranged by the University College ofLillehammer, which developed a website with information about the seminar and articleswritten by participants (http://australia.hil.no).

The author has some previous knowledge of Australian online education gained from theCisaer project (Paulsen, 2000) (www.nettskolen.com/in_english/cisaer/index.html).Knowledge about higher education in Australia is also based on the higher educationreport for the 2001-2003 triennium (DEST 2001).

Online Education Support SystemsThe online education environment is discussed in this article from a systems perspective thatcomprises a chain of four systems as listed below and shown in Figure 12.




www.usq.edu.au

www.uq.edu.au

www.cqu.edu.au

www.gu.edu.au

www.csu.edu.au

www.uts.edu.au

www.uow.edu.au

www.jcu.edu.au

http://australia.hil.no

www.nettskolen.com/in_english/cisaer/index.html

n Content Creation Tools (CCT)n Learning Management Systems (LMS)n Student Management Systems (SMS)n Accounting Systems (AS)

Figure 12. The jigsaw model for online education support systems

These online education support systems are more or less integrated, in that they may over-lap, exchange data, or work seamlessly together. So far, in most institutions high levels ofintegration among systems remains limited. In a discussion of integration between LearningManagement Systems (LMS) systems, Student Management Systems (SMS) systems, andAccounting Systems (AS) systems in Norwegian higher education institutions, Runnestø andRistesund (2002, 159) concluded that there is a general lack of integration between LMSsystems and SMS systems.

There are several emerging specifications of standards, such as the IMS Global LearningConsortium (IMS) (www.imsproject.org) and Sharable Content Object Reference Model(SCORM) (www.adlnet.org/scorm/downloads.cfm), which may result in improved andeasier integration between the four systems. However, the results of this article reveal thatthere is still little focus on standards in Australian, Norwegian, and Swedish higher education.

A compilation of the online education support systems used by universities visited ispresented in Table 20. The author has not had the capacity at this time, to compile informa-tion about which CCT and AS systems the universities are using.

Table 20. Online education support systems used by the Australian institutions visited

University LMS SMS and other systems Standards mentioned

University of Southern Blackboard, Peoplesoft, Web-trends, XML,Queensland WebCT, Rightnow.com, GOOD IMS

Vista

University of Queensland WebCT Peoplesoft

Central Queensland University WebCT Peoplesoft

Griffith University Blackboard Peoplesoft, Self-developed (learning@GU)

O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N S U P P O R T S Y S T E M S


IMS

Co

nten

t & P

ackagin

g S

pec.

IMS

En

terprise S

pec.

AgressoWord/FrontPage

ContentCreation

Tools(CCR)

LearningManagement

Systems(LMS)

StudentManagement

Systems(SMS)

AccountingSystems

(AS)

WebCT/ClassFronter

FS/MSTAS/LADOC

www.imsproject.org

www.adlnet.org/scorm/downloads.cfm

Charles Sturt University In-house, BannerBlackboard, WebCT

University of Technology, Blackboard, Student OneSydney WebCT

University of Wollongong WebCT Self-developed: LOL IMS

James Cook University Blackboard Self-developed: studentsonline

In the following, each of the four categories of online education support systems is dis-cussed with particular attention paid to systems integration and national differences.

Content Creation ToolsContent creation tools (CCT) are used to develop learning material. Typical examples ofsuch CCT systems are DreamWeaver, Frontpage, Word, PowerPoint, and Director. Theseare generic CCT systems with few features developed specially for online education. Thereare probably few national differences with regard to educational use of these CCTsystems. Because there are many types of content such as plain text, slides, graphics,pictures, animations, audio, video etc., it is likely that institutions will need several CCTs.Moreover, it is unlikely that a single LMS system could meet all the needs for contentcreation.

Integration Between CCT and LMS SystemsGrowing focus on standards, such as IMS and SCORM, may provide greater exchange-ability of content between LMS systems. For example, The IMS Content and PackagingSpecification will make it easier to create reusable content objects useful in a variety oflearning systems. However, one should also take note that these are “specifications” ratherthan “standards.” As such, specifications are still developing and have not yet been ratifiedby any international standards-accrediting agencies. BlackBoard and WebCT, for instance,are partnering with IMS to develop and support such specifications.

It is also worthwhile to note that some LMS systems provide more or less advanced fea-tures for content creation. Creation of quizzes, multiple-choice assignments etc., are oftenhandled more efficiently by LMS systems than by generic CCT systems. There are also spe-cific content creation tools for creation of tests, and as such, The IMS Question Test Specifi-cation addresses the need to share test items and other assessment tools across differentsystems. Finally, one should also be aware that LMS systems may require templates andprovide publishing features that may support or complicate the integration of CCT and LMSsystems.





Learning Management SystemsIn Australia, WebCT is perhaps the most widespread LMS system, with Blackboard rankingsecond. An NCODE-FLA (2002) LMS survey (http://ncode.mq.edu.au) of 34 Australianinstitutions showed 24 instances of WebCT use, 12 instances of BlackBoard use, and sixinstances of in-house developed LMS systems. This finding is supported by a brief onleading learning platforms (The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2002),which shows that Australia holds the highest penetration of BlackBoard and WebCT, with76 percent of the country’s 34 universities licensing such LMS systems.

Among the Australian universities visited, WebCT is used at USQ, UQ, CQU, CSU,UTS, and UW; whereas Blackboard is used by USQ, GU, CSU, UTS, and JCU. The tourindicated that the gross figures would need to be closely examined to determine the levelat which each application was used on both a subject and department level, as comparedto an enterprise level.

In a personal e-mail, one manager at Charles Stuart University (CSU) Online reportedthat WebCT is the most commonly used LMS in Australia, but that Blackboard is used in themajority of enterprise installations. He further stated there are many stand-alone LMS instal-lations used throughout Australia, and that such systems will never integrate with enterprisesystems. These stand-alone systems are consistently counted in raw survey data, but onemust question if they should be counted equally.

Charles Stuart University’s online manager also reported using an in-house developedLMS, and they were just beginning a trial of Blackboard. Having used WebCT in the pastfor various small projects, CSU recently made the decision to switch from WebCT to Black-Board after a long, democratic process of discussion.

The University of Southern Queensland (USQ) has recently decided to use WebCTVista, which was released in Australia in March 2002. USQ will use WebCT Vista forlocal and domestic students, but also continue to use Blackboard for USQOnline in con-junction with their commercial partner, NextEd. Their intention is to manage the transition toboth LMS platforms from GOOD via the IMS specification.

Table 21. Number of LMS systems in Australia’s 34 universities




In-house 6


WebMentor 1

FirstClass 1 www.firstclass.com

Callista 1


(Source: NCODE-FLA, 2002)


www.webct.com

www.blackboard.com

www.wbtsystems.com

www.firstclass.com

www.lotus.com



The NCODE survey (2002) showed that BlackBoard was the only LMS supported centrallyat Edit Cowan University (ECU). However, they have previously used both WebCT and asystem developed in-house. Further details from ECU are available in a case study (TheObservatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2002).

It is interesting to note the dominance of commercial North American systems in Aus-tralia. Although there is an overall lack of Australian-developed systems on a commerciallevel, there are some systems developed in-house. This raises some concerns in Australia,in that the two major LMS players have the market “stitched,” meaning that the systems areembedded in the operational culture of Australia’s higher education institutions and thatuncompetitive pricing structures could evolve.

An analysis of LMS systems in the Nordic countries (Paulsen 2002) states that Nordicinstitutions tend to prefer LMS systems developed in Nordic countries. Among the 25different LMS systems identified in the analysis, 16 were of Nordic origin. All other systemswere of American, Canadian, or Irish origin. The analysis further indicated that Classfron-ter, WebCT, FirstClass, and BlackBoard are the most commonly used LMS systems in theNordic countries.

In Norwegian higher education, the dominant system in use is the Norwegian devel-oped system Classfronter (www.fronter.com), while some colleges use standard commercialsystems, and others have developed their systems in-house. Of Norway’s 54 universitiesand colleges, 32 offer online education (Runnestø and Ristesund 2002, p. 36). As shownin Table 22, several Norwegian universities use more than one system.

Table 22. Number of LMS systems used in 54 Norwegian institutions of higher education


Classfronter 21 www.fronter.com

In-house developed 9

Luvit 6 www.luvit.com

IT’s Learning 4 www.itsolutions.no

First Class 3 www.firstclass.com

Kark 3 http://kark.uib.no





TeamWave 1

Response 1

(Source: Runnestø and Ristesund, 2002)

www.fronter.com

www.fronter.com

www.luvit.com

www.itsolutions.no

www.firstclass.com

http://kark.uib.no

www.webct.com

www.blackboard.com

www.wbtsystems.com

www.lotus.com

Norwegian institutions emphasize the importance of using Norwegian-developed systemsthat are responsive to informational and feedback needs specific to Norwegian institutions.

In Swedish universities and colleges, no one system seems to dominate, but a number ofstandard commercial systems are used. According to personal e-mail correspondence withone of Sweden’s leading experts on LMS systems, Fredrik Rexhammar (March 18, 2002),Luvit (www.luvit.com), Lecando, Infinity, Grade, Platon, and Web Academy, are the currentSwedish-providers of LMS systems. Rexhammar also stated that WebCT and Blackboardare the most common foreign LMS systems currently used in Sweden. In addition, theSwedish-developed system PingPong (www.partitur.se) is also used by some institutions.The following systems are listed in a market overview of LMS systems(www.ssv.gov.se/avit/pform2.htm): Luvit, Mentor, Telia Instant Education, Maestro,FirstClass, Comenius Online, Lecando, Librix, Marratech, PingPong, Surfa och lär, andWebCat.

Integration Between LMS and SMS SystemsFor historical, legal, and financial reasons, SMS systems tend to be more important thanLMS systems. This is because the SMS usually serves as the “master system” from which theLMS accesses and draws necessary data. As a result, integration between SMS and LMSsystems tend to vary in sophistication. One may distinguish between the following fourlevels of integration:

1. Both systems access the same database. However, since few existing systems wereoriginally designed with integration and security in mind, high levels of integration maybe difficult to achieve.

2. Both systems have separate databases, but the data is frequently updated andexchanged in a synchronized manner, for example during a daily batch process.

3. Data is frequently transferred one way, from the SMS database to the LMS database,for example during a daily batch process.

4. Data is transferred from the SMS database to the LMS database at the beginning ofeach semester when students are registered in the SMS. This process may be handledmanually.

IMS, SCORM, and other specifications, may facilitate data exchange, thereby making iteasier for institutions to substitute one system for another. Hence, these specifications maymake institutions less dependent on system providers. For example, The IMS EnterpriseSpecification is aimed at administrative applications and services that need to share dataabout students, courses, and performance across platforms, operating systems, and userinterfaces. Similarly, the IMS Learner Profiles Specification describes ways to organize stu-dent information, so the systems can be more responsive to the specific needs of each user.

One faculty member at Central Queensland University (CQU) reported in a personal e-mail, that an IMS consultant recently claimed that WebCT, Blackboard and PeopleSoft hadagreed on IMS interoperability specifications, presumably for future releases.



www.luvit.com

www.partitur.se


Runnestø and Ristesund (2002, p. 159) pointed out that they found a general lack ofintegration between LMS systems and SMS systems in Norwegian colleges and universi-ties. Awareness of this “lack of integration” is increasing in both Australia and Scandinavia.In the NCODE-FLA survey (2002), 11 Australian universities reported varying levels of inte-gration as shown in the quotes below:

■ The University of Adelaide has achieved full integration with PeopleSoft, employingnightly updates for staff and student details.

■ Deakin University uses Callista as its student record system and Concept as its humanresource system. Both systems are integrated with TopClass, with a fairly administrative-intensive transfer of records between FirstClass and the corporate administrative appli-cations. There is no link with WebCT.

■ Edith Cowan University uses a homegrown records system and enrollment system;however, these systems will be replaced by Callista in the future. The human systemcurrently in use is Concept, and Blackboard is integrated with the existing student andhuman resources systems.

■ Griffiths University uses PeopleSoft, which is fully integrated with its other systems.■ James Cook University has achieved integration with its JCU web, whereas purpose-

built StudentsOnline and StaffOnline systems work remains ongoing.■ Northern Territory University is currently using the ASCOL student administration system

and developing a Callista TAFE version. When development is completed, Callista willbe implemented university wide. Integration with other systems is planned to occur asCallista is implemented.

■ The University of Melbourne uses a homegrown student administration system, Merlin,and human resources system Genesys, which are integrated with its LMS, WebRaft.WebRaft is integrated with Melbourne University’s e-mail system.

■ The University of New England uses Banner Student and Concept, which are bothhighly integrated using API with Banner and username and password systems.

■ The University of the Sunshine Coast uses PeopleSoft for student administration, finance,human resources, and payroll. In its recent LMS tender, they are looking for integrationwith its PS systems.

■ The University of Tasmania is in the market for a new student system: Concept andHRMS. Both are to be integrated with WebCT.

■ The University of Western Sydney is using Concept for staff administration, alongsidean in-house student administration system, SRS. These systems are only minimally andvariously integrated with current LMS systems in use. Callista is slated to be imple-mented mid-2002, with the goal of developing gradual interoperability within an inte-grated system.

Student Management SystemsThere seems to be more national coordination and/or governmental coercion in terms ofchoice of SMS systems used in Scandinavia, than is the case in Australia. Many SMS



systems used in Australia were developed in North America such as: PeopleSoft (CQU,GU), Banner (CSU), and Student One (UTS). However, other universities like the Universityof Wollongong (UW) and James Cook University (JCU), for example, have developed in-house systems, and therefore changing to a commercial system appears to be a major eco-nomic obstacle.

The NCODE-FLA survey (2002) provided information about the SMS-systems used by21 of Australia’s 34 universities. This survey indicates that PeopleSoft is the most widely-used commercial SMS system in Australia. It also shows that Callista is also widely usedand that a number of institutions plan to switch, or are in the process of switching, to Cal-lista. This survey also supports my impression that several universities have chosen todevelop their systems in-house. It must be noted, that a relatively large range of other sys-tems are also mentioned in the survey.

Table 23. Numbers of SMS systems used in Australia’s 34 universities

SMS URL Number of Instances

PeopleSoft www.peoplesoft.com 8

Callista www.callista.com.au 6

In-house developed system 5

(Source: NCODE-FLA, 2002)

In Norway, two student management systems dominate the higher education market: FellesSystem (FS) (www.fs.usit.uio.no) used by most universities, and MSTAS (www.enet.no) usedby most colleges. However, it must be emphasized that the two largest private collegeshave chosen alternative solutions: The Norwegian School of Management uses Bannerand NKI has developed its own in-house system, STAS.

FS is a computer-based student management system developed for universities andcolleges in Norway. The first version of FS was developed in 1995-1996 and financed bythe Ministry of Education with € 10 million.

Between 1996 and 2001, the following institutions have started using FS:

■ Universities: Norwegian University of Technology and Science, University of Bergen,University of Oslo, and University of Tromsø

■ State colleges: Oslo School of Architecture, Norwegian School of Economics andBusiness Administration, Agricultural University of Norway

■ Colleges: Agder University College, Bergen University College, Buskerud UniversityCollege, Oslo University College, Stavanger University College, Sør-TrøndelagUniversity College, Tromsø University College, Stord/Haugesund College, NorwegianLutheran School of Theology, Norwegian Academy of Music, National Art and DesignInstitute in Bergen



www.peoplesoft.com

www.callista.com.au

www.fs.usit.uio.no

www.enet.no

All publicly financed educational institutions that wish to use FS have access to it. Costs ofmaintenance and further development are shared among user institutions. This system hasthe following features:

■ Persons (applicants, students, subject teachers/specialists and letter and address solu-tions)

■ Application and admission procedure■ Study elements (Courses, subjects, study programs, requirements and regulations)■ Right of Admission, classes, leave of absence■ Term registration (invoice for term fee, automatic term registration)■ Payment (fees for study and exams, reports to financial systems)■ Lecture (planning, publishing, student administration)■ Exam (planning and student administration)■ Qualification (awarding of degrees and diplomas)■ Master and PhD (admission and student administration)■ Further and continuing education■ Application for recognition of foreign or external credentials■ Scholarships (application and awarding)■ Exchange students■ Reports to various governmental agencies among others.

(www.fs.usit.uio.no/fs-english.html)

All Swedish Universities use LADOK or LADOK NOVAU, owned by a consortium of 37Swedish higher education institutions. Information about the LADOK consortium isavailable at www.ladok.umu.se. LADOK is a computer-based student admission anddocumentation system for a university or university college. It focuses on administration ofundergraduate and graduate studies. The system is locally deployed and managed bythe institutions.

The LADOK system has a “mutual core,” identical to all LADOK system installations inSweden. This “mutual core” consists of a structure of database tables and computerprograms. Every institution decides which parts of the “mutual core” it wishes to use. It isalso possible to use locally developed addendums. In essence, the LADOK system can beviewed as a large “smorgasbord” from which the institution can pick-and-choose whichparts it needs to use.

The LADOK system consists of two major parts: the admission system, and the documen-tation system. They are integrated and share data – e.g., name, address, and other factsabout applicants and students. A third part, handling documentation of graduate students,has been added to the LADOK system’s “mutual core.” Undergraduate studies are handledin terms of single courses and programs of study usually totaling three or four years inlength. System files contain information for student identification, general eligibility for uni-versity studies, admission to courses and study programs, registration on courses per semes-ter, course data, credit points from courses, degrees awarded, and international studies.



www.fs.usit.uio.no/fs-english.html

www.ladok.umu.se

The LADOK system mainly focuses on student admission and documentation, planningand follow-up. This system was designed for use in all Swedish state financed institutionsof higher education. Users of the LADOK system at an institution can be found at alllevels:

■ University board and administration■ Faculty or school heads■ Departments■ Students

Data from LADOK is exported to the Ministry of Education and other agencies for follow-uppurposes. An important objective of LADOK is to prepare and generate the annual invoiceto the government for institutional level undergraduate studies. Although the LADOK systemis owned by a consortium of 37 Swedish higher education institutions, maintenance for theLADOK system “mutual core” is the responsibility of a maintenance group at the Universityof Umeå. Local system usage is the responsibility of individual institutions, including pay-ment for servers, networking, terminal equipment, and local support.

Integration between LMS, SMS and AS SystemsMost institutions have relied on accounting systems for many years. Although AS systemswere not developed for integration with LMS systems in mind, they are often part of, orminimally integrated with, a university’s SMS systems. So far, integration between the LMSand AS systems has not attracted much attention. As online education generates moreincome for institutions, it is likely that increased levels of systems integration will becomemore important. Some institutions already accept that online enrollment, payment, andstudent credit account information must become more central.

Accounting SystemsIn contrast to Australia, which enjoys a long history of serving tuition-paying students,Sweden does not accept any tuition fees from its students. In recent years, however,Norwegian universities and colleges have begun charging their students tuition for furtherand continuing education courses. These national differences are significant, in that bothcountries have developed different incentives for the development of online education andthe integration of their AS systems with their SMS and LMS systems.

The accounting systems used in Australian systems are integrated functionally with theSMS or LMS systems. This seems to be the situation for the SMS systems: PeopleSoft andStudent One. Similarly, Banner is an integrated accounting system used in the LMS systemBlackBoard. In contrast, a separate accounting system named Agresso (www.agresso.com)seems to be dominant in both Norway and Sweden.



www.agresso.com

Discussion and ConclusionsIn comparing online education support systems in Australia, Norway, and Sweden, severalimportant issues become apparent. The most prominent finding facing all three countries isthe general lack of integration between content-creation tools, LMS systems, student man-agement systems, and accounting systems. To overcome these shortcomings, many institu-tions have recently initiated efforts to improve overall systems integration. It is hypothesizedthat those institutions that implement seamlessly integrated systems, will likely improve theirchances of becoming successful, large-scale online education providers.

In all three countries, little attention has been paid to adherence to such standards as theIMS and SCORM specifications in higher education. This may stem from institutions’ limitedknowledge about such specifications, skepticism about the sustainability of specifications,general resistance to standards that seemingly limit individual freedom, and/or a consciousdecision that adoption of such specifications is not important enough to justify cost andresource expenditures. Barron (2001) discusses some of these issues in detail.

Norway and Sweden tend to prefer nationally developed LMS and SMS systems. Onthe other hand, Australian institutions tend to prefer using commercially-produced systems.This difference may reflect language issues, but it may also stem from pedagogical tradi-tions and other cultural factors.

In terms of choosing of SMS systems, higher levels of national coordination and/orgovernmental coercion are more evident in Scandinavia than they are in Australia. Manyof the SMS systems used in Australia were developed in North America. However, twoNorwegian systems and one Swedish system completely dominate in the Scandinaviancountries, which may possibly result in future collaboration among the Scandinavianuniversities, surpassing that of Australian universities.

As compared to Norwegian and Swedish universities, Australian universities regardonline education as a source of income. This difference may account for greater awarenessin Australia of the necessity of integration among AS, LMS, and SMS systems. The moststriking difference between the three countries with regard to online education is related toeconomic policy. In Australia, education is viewed as one of the country’s most importantexport industries. The education and training action plan for the information economy fromthe Commonwealth Government (DEST 2000) clearly states: “Education in Australia is amulti-billion dollar export industry of vital importance to our economy.” However, in Scandi-navia, export of education does not even seem to be an issue for public discussion.

Australia benefits from having English as its first language. In contrast, Norwegian andSwedish are home to minority languages, and this fact alone may be one reason thathigher education institutions in Norway and Sweden appear to be much less interested inexporting online education to other countries, compared to their Australian counterparts.

In Scandinavia, education is traditionally perceived as a public service that should beavailable free of charge. Although there is increasing acceptance of commercialization ofeducation, Swedish universities are not allowed to charge their students tuition fees. Incomparison, Norwegian universities and colleges are now obliged to charge tuition fees



for further and continuing education – educational initiatives that in recent years havebecome the most dynamic and innovative sector of education in Norway. Since Swedenlacks this economic incentive for change, the country will likely face future difficulties whencompeting with online education in other countries.

On balance, online education appears to be less developed in Sweden than it is inAustralia and Norway. This may be partly due to the lack of economic incentives to offeronline programs as a source of extra income. It may also be due to the fact that govern-mental online education initiatives tend to be imposed, and often without local institutionalsupport. One such example is the three Swedish distance education consortia, which havereceived considerable governmental funding since 1993-94 (Hillefors et al., 2001, p. 22;Ranebo, 2001). At their peak, these three consortia offered from 40 to 50 courses to5,000 to 6,000 students (Hillefors et al., 2001, p. 26). After nearly ten years of unimpres-sive results, funding is to be discontinued. To replace these consortia, the Swedish govern-ment has recently established Nätuniversitetet (www.netuniversity.se), a new national bodyto fund and coordinate Sweden’s distance education activities. In 2002, Nätuniversitetetwill provide financial funding for the equivalent of 2,350 full-time students at 30 Swedishhigher education institutions.

Norwegian institutions typically charge students € 3,000 to 4,000 for online courses,equivalent to one-year of full-time study. In contrast, for the year 2002, Swedish universitieswill receive € 12,000 in governmental funding from Nätuniversitetet for similar onlinecourses of equivalent length. This is about three times more funding than Swedish universi-ties receive for an on-campus student engaged in full time studies. Such lavish funding isprobably intended to increase the development of online courses. However, it could alsoeasily set a standard for future costs of online education courses. In the view of this author,the Swedish approach is unwise, as it is not cost-effective and could set an unhealthyprecedent for future overspending.

ReferencesBarron, T. 2001. Standards: The Vision and the Hype. American Society for Training &Development (ASTD). (www.learningcircuits.org/nov2000/standards.html)

DEST 2000. Learning for the knowledge society. An education and training action plan forthe information economy. (www.dest.gov.au/schools/Publications/2000/learning.htm)

DEST 2001. Higher education report for the 2001-2003 triennium.(www.detya.gov.au/highered/he_report/2001_2003/html/1.htm)

Hillefors, L., Myringer B., Svanteson B., Rathsman I., and Gisselberg M. 2001. Ett Nät-universitet för livslångt lärande och kompetensutveckling. Rapport från en utredning utfördpå uppdrag av styrelserna för Distanskonsortiet, Svenska Distanshögskolan ock Västsvenskakonsortiet för flexibelt lärande.

NCODE-FLA 2002. (http://ncode.mq.edu.au/papers/lmsSurvey.doc)




www.learningcircuits.org/nov2000/standards.html

www.dest.gov.au/schools/Publications/2000/learning.htm

www.detya.gov.au/highered/he_report/2001_2003/html/1.htm


Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 2002. No. 2, March 2002. LeadingLearning Platforms: International Market Presence.(www.obhe.ac.uk/products/briefings/pdfs/LearningPlatforms.pdf)

Observatory on Borderless Higher Education 2002. No. 2, March 2002. Concise CaseStudy – Learning Platforms. Implementation of a Learning Platform at Edith CowanUniversity, Australia. (www.obhe.ac.uk/products/briefings/pdfs/LearningPlatforms.pdf)

Paulsen, M. F. 2002. An Analysis of Online Education and Learning Management Systemsin the Nordic Countries. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Vol. 5, No 3,Fall 2002. (www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/fall53/paulsen53.html)

Paulsen, M. F. 2000. Online Education. An International Analysis of Web-based Educationand Strategic Recommendations for Decision Makers. Oslo: NKI Forlaget.

Ranebo, S. 2001. Nordisk kartlägging av nationella initiativ rörande utvecklingen avVirtuella universitet. Nordiska ministerràdets IT-policygrupp.(www.yh.aland.fi/dokument/IT_P_VU_rapport_Final.pdf)

Runnestø, R. and Ristesund G. 2002. Experiences with Learning Management Systems inNorwegian Universities and Colleges. (www.nettskolen.com/forskning/Diploma%20project.pdf)





www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/fall53/paulsen53.html

www.yh.aland.fi/dokument/IT_P_VU_rapport_Final.pdf



Anecdote 8. NKI Fjernundervisning: Two Decades of OnlineSustainabilityBy Morten Flate Paulsen and Torstein Rekkedal

This article is so far the last in a series of case descriptions written about the NKI InternetCollege. Much of the content is based on the previous three articles:

1. The NKI Electronic College: Five Years of Computer Conferencing in DistanceEducation (Paulsen 1992).

2. The NKI Open Electronic College (Paulsen 1995).3. The NKI Internet College: A Review of 15 Years Delivery of 10,000 Online Courses

(Paulsen and Rekkedal 2001).

One may say that the three articles present the three first generations of the NKI InternetCollege and that this fourth article includes updated information and additional discussionregarding the fourth generation of the college.

AbstractThis article presents a case description of NKI Distance Education and its experiences withonline education from the time the idea was conceived in 1985 to the point when the totalnumber of course enrollments exceeded 30,000 in August 2003. The article discussesimportant issues related to the development from a correspondence school to an onlineinstitution. The development covers four generations of online education. The first genera-tion (1985-1994) was characterized by development of the EKKO LMS system and experi-mentation with emerging technology and pedagogy. The second generation (1994-96)was a period of transition from the EKKO system to Internet systems with text-based userinterfaces. The third generation (1996-2000) began with the introduction of graphic userinterfaces and the web. It was characterized by vigorous expansion and the developmentof Web-based systems for administration of online education. The fourth generation (2000-),started with the development of SESAM, NKI’s integrated LMS system.



www.studymentor.com

NKI: A Non-profit Foundation with Idealistic Aims

NKI (www.nki.no) is one of the largest nongovernmentaleducational institutions in Scandinavia. The NKI Groupis organized as a non-profit foundation comprising NKIDistance Education, The Norwegian School of Informa-tion Technology (NITH), The Business Training Center(NA) and NKI Publishing House. In 2002, NKI hadabout 300 full-time and 1,600 part-time employees. Thegroup’s head office is situated in Oslo, and there aredistrict offices in 15 other towns. Altogether the NKIGroup has each year a total of around 6,000 full-timeand 25,000 part-time students.

NKI was established in Norway in 1959, and the NKI Group has legally been a non-profit foundation since 1974. Financial surplus is kept within the organization for futuredevelopment. Thus, NKI Distance Education is also a non-profit organization aiming to sup-port Norway’s educational policy as a reputable complement to the public educationsystem. The overall business idea is “to cover needs for competence development byoffering courses and programs for adult learning adapted to the participants’ previousknowledge and skills, place of residence and socio-economic conditions.” (NKI, 1999, p.3). As a nongovernmental institution, NKI is largely dependent on student fees for its opera-tion, but it also receives some state support. As a fee-charging institution, NKI has beendevoted to beliefs and values of the service industry, considering students as customers whohave all the right to demand high quality services. State accreditation has also required theinstitution to develop and update a formal system for quality assurance (Ljoså & Rekkedal,1993; NADE, 1996).

NKI is recognized by the Ministry of Education and receives government grants cover-ing less than 10% of operating costs. NKI Distance Education employs some 65 full-timeand 400 part-time employees. The number of active students has typically been around12,000, but varies from month to month as shown in Figure 13. Online course enrollmentshave increased substantially since 1996, but still only 40% of the active students havechosen online courses. During the last two decades NKI Distance Education has developedfrom a correspondence school to an institution applying the Internet for delivery of a largenumber of courses.


www.nki.no

Figure 13. Monthly variation in active NKI students

In 2002, the revenue of NKI Distance Education was about € 12 million and 36% of therevenue came from online education. Still, there is a substantial demand for traditional dis-tance education courses, which in the year 2003 will constitute more than 50% of revenues.

NKI was one of the very first European online colleges, and it has offered online,distance education every day since 1987. Few, if any, online colleges in the world havebeen longer in continuous operation.

The expansion in online enrollments from 1987 to 2002 is shown in Figure 14. In June2003, the accumulated number of course enrollments was 30,000, and the NKI InternetCollege had about 150 tutors and 5,000 registered students. Most of the students live inNorway, and almost all courses are taught in Norwegian. But there were 139 studentsregistered with addresses in 36 foreign countries around the world. Of all the onlinestudents, 52% were women.

Figure 14. Number of course enrollments per year on NKI online courses since 1987



Structure, Culture and ProcessesAlthough NKI Distance Education is one unit in a larger educational institution, it has alarge degree of independence and may be viewed as a single-mode distance teachinginstitution. The core competence of the institution is development and delivery of cost-effective distance teaching programs. The institution has six departments: Academic Staff(including Research and Development), Learning Material Development, Student Counsel-ing and Teaching Administration, Sales Department, Marketing Department, and Adminis-trative and Clerical Staff.

Table 24. The NKI Distance Education Departments in 2000

Departments Number of employees Budget

Student Counseling and Teaching Administration 11 33%

Marketing Department 3,5 20%

Learning Material Development 11,5 14%

Administrative and Clerical Staff 14 14%

Sales Department 11 10%

Academic staff/Research and Development 13 9%

New courses and programs are developed by project teams, normally chaired by a repre-sentative from the Academic Staff, and including personnel from other departments andexternal specialists as course authors and consultants. There is a permanent external staff ofsome 350 part-time tutors coming from other educational institutions, research organiza-tions, and business and industry. Before they start teaching, NKI requires them to completethe course Tutor in Distance Education that since 2000 has been offered only online.

Courses and ProgramsNKI Distance Education offers both traditional distance education programs and onlineprograms via the Internet. Altogether, this constitutes approximately 100 programs andmore than 400 courses at secondary and undergraduate levels, as well as specializedcourses for competence development in business and industry.

In June 2003, more than 55 complete study programs and 370 different courses atsecondary and tertiary level were taught online. The increase in course enrollments is partlydue to the increasing number of courses that have been offered online as shown in Table25.


Table 25. Increases in NKI online courses and enrollments

Year Number of courses Number of course Number of enrollmentstaught online enrollments per course

1995 13 256 19,7

1996 21 416 19,8

1997 29 953 32,9

1998 48 2148 44,8

1999 78 3228 41,4

2000 151 5911 39,1

2001 210 5724 27,3

2002 288 7464 25,9

NKI Distance Education offers courses and programs at secondary and tertiary level.Almost all courses are part of a program. Students may enroll in only one course, but theyare encouraged to study a complete program. Most programs are equivalent to onesemester, one year, or two years of full-time studies. They cover a wide range of subjectareas. Some are specially developed courses preparing for careers in business andindustry with no parallel in the public school system. Other programs and courses pre-pare for state examinations. Courses at tertiary level are either specifically accredited bythe University Council or offered in co-operation with NITH, a public college or university.

Media, Methods and Learning MaterialNKI was mainly a correspondence institution till the beginning of the 80s, when video-tapes, audiotapes, fax, radio and TV programs, computer software and laboratory kits,and in some cases, audiographics, satellite and local cable television were introduced– in many cases only as part of experimental and research projects (Rekkedal, 1993).The basic strategy underlying all experiments has been student flexibility, including thepossibility of starting at any time and studying with individual progression. This hasmeant that media suitable for flexible and individual studies have been preferred beforemedia requiring students to meet at fixed times and places. Quite early, the NKIresearch group understood that computer mediated communication would become animportant technology in the future (Paulsen, 1987; Paulsen & Rekkedal, 1988). This isthe reason for NKI’s continuous research, evaluation and development of online coursesand programs since 1987. Initially, the online courses included only text. With theintroduction of the Web, graphics, animations, and multimedia gradually emerged. Inthe last few years, NKI has experimented with online audio and video as a supplementto other course content. For this purpose, NKI has used the theoretical model shown in

Figure 15. But too many students still lack the necessary bandwidth and computer equip-ment; so obligatory multimedia elements are restricted to special courses or user groups.

Figure 15. NKI’s model for multimedia content

Teaching, Research and EvaluationNKI is primarily an effective and efficient distance teaching institution. Although research isnot among its main activities, unlike most other nongovernmental distance teaching institu-tions in Norway, it has established a research department that has maintained a continuousresearch agenda for 30 years (Rekkedal, 1998). The main aims of the research activitiesare quality assurance, institutional development, competence building, public relations, andcontact with national and international academic institutions. The research projects, inparticular, on online education have received considerable national and European funding.

Figure 16. Timeline showing NKI research activities


Economy and Cost-effectivenessMost Norwegians have the financial means to pay for private education, but little motiva-tion to do so, as education generally is considered to be a free service. Distance educationis financially supported by the state. This scheme of state funding has resulted in lowertuition fees for the students. However, state support to distance education has continuouslydecreased from nearly 100% in 1975 to less than 10% in 2003. The amount of statemoney received is based on overall study activity during the preceding four years meas-ured by students’ completion of courses. In addition, distance students may apply for stategrants and loans on similar conditions as ordinary students in public and private schoolsand colleges. Recently, public institutions have been given greater freedom to charge feesfor further and continuing education, resulting in more “fair” competition and subsequently achange in attitudes concerning tuition fees.

In this competitive environment, NKI is still dependent on being continuously cost-effective. This means that during the conversion process from traditional distance teachingdelivery to effective online delivery there is an absolute need to earn income from existingcourses delivered traditionally and at the same time develop new courses and programs foronline delivery. To keep pace with the developing market is a main priority.

Institutional Environmental DemandsThe NKI Group has four income-earning units. The units have internal co-operation but tooptimize effectiveness and cost-efficiency, are supposed to act independently. They aregenerally dependent on the central management for IT support, personnel management aswell as budgeting and accounting services. Although top management initiates strategicplanning, the Director of Distance Education has full responsibility for conducting the strate-gic planning process. Until 1997, online education was included in the strategic planningprocess as one among many technologies. In 1997, the increasing online activity andinstitutional attention to online education reached a level that sparked a separate strategicplanning process that resulted in a distinct online education strategy (NKI, 1997).

NKI Distance Education is supposed, by legislation, governmental requirements and byNKI management, to maintain a quality assurance system to control and assess its quality.Student evaluation in different forms is often carried out to gain information about thequality of learning materials, teaching processes and administrative systems.

NKI Distance Education is required to generate a surplus every year for financing centraland administrative functions. Investments for future development, such as transforming theorganization from a traditional distance teaching institution to online delivery, have to befinanced through the ordinary operational budgets.

NKI Distance Education co-operates closely with NKI’s Norwegian School of Informa-tion Technology (NITH). Courses and programs from the NITH are offered as distancestudies through NKI Distance Education. As the NITH specializes in information technologyprograms, its academics and students have been important resources in the development ofonline teaching. The initiative of the first experiments and the development of the first EKKOLMS system came from the NITH.


NKI Distance Education is also collaborating with public universities, colleges, second-ary schools, and study organizations. One example is undergraduate studies in “Psycho-logy” where NKI organizes and operates the online education, but students enroll at theUniversity of Oslo and take the university exams. A similar example is “IT for Teachers”where students take the exams at Bodø College. NKI also co-operates with study organiza-tions where local organizers arrange face-to-face classes for NKI distance students.

Four Generations of Online EducationNKI has experienced four generations of online education. The first generation system,1985-1994, was based upon the EKKO computer conferencing system developed at NKI.The second generation, 1994-1996, was Internet-based and the third generation,1996–2000, was characterized by Web commitment. The fourth generation started in2000 with the integration between the LMS system SESAM and the student administrationsystem STAS.

First Generation: Pioneering Online Education from 1985 to 1994The idea of online teaching, under the name “The NKI Electronic College”, was conceivedin 1985 and further developed by research on existing computer conferencing systemssuch as PortaCom, EIES, and CoSy, and on electronic colleges such as ConnectedEducation and the Western Behavioral Sciences Institute (Paulsen, 1989). The basis of ourideas for establishing the “Electronic College” was largely taken from the Virtual ClassroomProject (Hiltz 1986). In an early paper, Paulsen (1989) pointed out the following require-ments for a virtual school:

1. It should emulate all the main tasks of a school: pedagogical, administrative andsocial.

2. It should be generally available in terms of geography, technology, economy and,competence.

3. It should be independent of time, i.e., continuously available and accept asynchronouscommunication.

4. It should emulate the different needs of human communication, one-to-one, one-to-many,and many-to-many.

During the first two years, the project was propelled by a handful of enthusiasts whodevoted much of their spare time to the project. The idea was to use computers to facilitateflexible interpersonal communication in distance education. Students, faculty, and staffcould communicate independently of time and space through the college’s central com-puter. They could exchange written messages both individually and in groups.


Figure 17. The EKKO LMS metaphor

The Electronic College needed administrative and logistical support from NKI DistanceEducation, and academic and technical support from the NITH. At first, few believed in theproject, making it hard to get the necessary support and to integrate the project into theNKI organization. Gradually, the Electronic College thrived with satisfied students, receiv-ing internal, national, and international recognition.

The first version of EKKO, the computer conferencing software hosting the electroniccollege, was designed and implemented during 1986. The system was used for the firsttime, as an optional supplement to on-campus teaching, in the autumn semester of 1986. Thefirst attempt to deliver a distance education course via EKKO was made during the autumnsemester of 1987. Two additional courses were introduced the following semester. Since thespring of 1990, the college has offered all ten courses within the Information ProcessingProgram every semester. These ten courses constitute the equivalent of a 1-year full-time program.

Inger Bergland, one of the first Norwegian online students, made the following state-ment about her experiences from the fall of 1987:

Generally, I evaluate the scheme very favorably. It is right on target to offer asystem pairing correspondence courses and evening classes. One may compareit with “combined courses,” a combination of correspondence courses andlectures, which I have favorable experiences with from high school courses. In myopinion, it is wonderful not to have to attend five-hour lectures twice a week afterwork. (Paulsen 1992)

Lars Eskeland and Rolf Ingebrigtsen wrote extensive reports about their online teachingexperiences in 1988 (Paulsen 1992). They stated that it had been an interesting and work-intensive teaching experience, but that their work could have been more efficient if EKKOhad been better adapted to the teachers’ needs. They also suggested that teaching wouldbe less work-intensive the next time the courses were offered because many of the text filescould be used again.


A comprehensive description of the experiences from the first generation is presented inthe article The NKI Electronic College: Five Years of Computer Conferencing in DistanceEducation (Paulsen 1992). The article presents results from surveys of teachers, students, andadministrators, as well as information about dropouts and grades. The article concludes:

The NKI Electronic College has proved its value through five years of operation,eight hundred courses sold, and to date, twenty graduates. These students havecompleted a ten-course program – equivalent to one year’s full-time study – viacomputer conferencing. Further, the students have obtained better grades thaneither correspondence students or on-campus students. The student surveys showthat the students have a positive perception of the curriculum and the ElectronicCollege. Student feedback also indicates that teacher activity is of crucial impor-tance to students’ perception of a course. The teachers are generally positiveabout the Electronic College and its opportunities; their main reservation is inregard to the heavy teacher workload introduced by the medium. This perceptionhighlights the importance of continued efforts to identify and refine efficient peda-gogical techniques for the future Electronic College.

The first-generation user-interface was based on the Microsoft Disk Operating System(MSDOS) and offered only black and white characters as shown in Figure 18. During itsmost intensive period, EKKO served more than 3,000 users, including on-campus students,prospective students, active distance students, former students, tutors and administrativestaff. The system included an e-mail system, closed and open conferences for administra-tive, teaching and social purposes, and bulletin boards. During the first-generation periodthe Electronic College delivered more than 1,000 courses with an average completion rateof above 80%.

Figure 18. The first-generation user-interface


Second Generation: Converting to the Internet from 1994 to 1996NKI considered the first generation of the electronic college to be quite a success as a dis-tance education system. However, we continually followed other developments in teachingand learning methods. We examined different products and software on the market, suchas CoSy, PortaCom, and FirstClass. We also studied the Internet with the aim of develop-ing an improved “second-generation” system. When we had to introduce new solutionsbecause of retirement of the old host computer, we decided to use the Internet, e-mail, theListserv conferencing system, and the Mhonarc archival system. Since few students hadInternet access, NKI also offered modem services to students.

The initial Internet platform represented in several ways a setback. The interface was stilltext-based and far from user-friendly. Norwegian characters and e-mail attachments werenot supported. On the other hand, we got access to many more potential students andonline resources. The following second-generation observations were presented in thepaper The NKI Open Electronic College (Paulsen 1995):

The first semester was marked by transition to the second-generation system.Students, faculty, staff, and system operators had to learn and adjust to the newsystem.

The open system introduced additional problems regarding e-mail transmissionof national characters and binary files. This is due to lack of standard interpreta-tions among e-mail systems.

Some students have e-mail addresses prior to enrollment, but the majority ofstudents must be provided with NKI e-mail addresses. With the increasing numberof e-mail users, NKI expects that a growing number of students will have e-mailaddresses prior to enrollment.

NKI has enrolled a few Norwegian students living abroad and also venturedto offer courses internationally. Experience shows that it is possible to offer coursesinternationally, but that the administration and logistics of such courses are nottrivial challenges.

Students have access to Internet resources outside the NKI realm. Somestudents report that they use these possibilities, and research should be conductedon how these services are utilized and what benefit the students have from them.

All the courses and programs developed after the introduction of the second-generationsystem were un-paced and without limits on times for enrollment. This solution was chosen asa result of general experiences and student evaluation surveys. “It is a major challenge todevelop methods and organizations in distance education based on computer conferencingsystems which take care of the students’ need for autonomy and flexibility” (Rekkedal, 1990,p. 92).

Initially, the second-generation user interface for modem users was text-based, relying onthe Telix communication software. The next step was, however, to offer modem users Inter-net access with communication software developed for MS-Windows and the Serial Line


Internet Protocol (SLIP). The new user-interface supported colors and graphics as shown inFigure 19.

Figure 19. The second-generation user-interface

Since few students had Internet access before enrollment, NKI provided free Internet accessto the students. In 1999, NKI discontinued this service when most enrolling studentsalready had Internet access through commercial Internet service providers.

Third Generation: Moving to the Web from 1996 to 2000The third generation was introduced with the first Web-based courses in 1996. It was aperiod of vigorous growth with nearly 100% increase in enrollments every year. Thisresulted in major organizational challenges and a need for efficient systems and structuresto manage large-scale online education.

An unexpected development, with regard to sales and marketing, was that the web siteresulted in a dramatic increase in online requests for course catalogues from prospectivestudents. In 1996, NKI had online requests from 789 prospective students. In 1998 and1999, the numbers increased to 7,615 and 13,506.

With the introduction of Web-based courses, more and more of the course content waspublished online. This introduced new challenges to design, copyright issues, and mainte-nance of course content. This made it crucial to develop and manage a system with pass-words so that only paying students had access to the course content.

The third-generation web service could be regarded as a two-level system. The toplevel, the NKI Internet College web site www.nettskolen.com depicted in Figure 20,provided general information about the college such as course descriptions, prices, con-tract form, contact information, support information, and an article library on online anddistance education. The graphical and user-friendly Web interface introduced opportunitiessuch as hyperlinking and multimedia presentations. However, there were also newchallenges such as access control and copyright issues.


www.nettskolen.com

Figure 20. Third-generation NKI home-page

The second level, the program homepages, was password-protected and could only beaccessed by NKI employees and fee-paying students. Figure 21 depicts an example of aprogram homepage. The course homepages were designed with a set of templates tosecure course conformity and efficient course development. A typical course homepageprovided links to each of the study guide units, to the tutor’s e-mail address, to the class dis-cussion forum, to external Internet services and resources, to a course evaluation form, andpossibly to multiple-choice assignments. The study units were also often designed so that thestudents could benefit from printing the material.

Figure 21. Example of a third-generation NKI program homepage


There is no doubt that the decision taken in 1996 to utilize standard Internet servers and clientsoftware used by the ordinary Internet user was a sound one. The Internet College puts greatemphasis on facilitating learning according to students’ needs, which could be described inthe following way. A student may enroll at any time in any of the programs and courses orpersonal choice of courses and follow his or her own progression schedule. The College isopen 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The students may choose to study individually or takepart in academic discussions or leisure and social communication with fellow students, teach-ers and alumni. In some courses group activities are obligatory. Concerning the conferences,we have chosen a combination of “push” (contributions sent as e-mail to all members of aconference) and “pull” (contributions archived and accessible to all members) technology.

Fourth Generation: Systems Integration from 2000Development from small-scale to large-scale online education represents a major challengefor an institution. So it was an important improvement when we introduced a new, self-developed LMS system in March 2001. The system was termed SESAM (ScalableEducational System for Administration and Management).

In SESAM, all users got their unique, personal portal with access only to the courses andresources that they should have access to. All resources were available with a single log-on.This was important because we wanted to make it easier for users to find the information theyneeded. It also allowed us to develop tailor-made services for individual users and user-groups.

SESAM was developed to be integrated with STAS, NKI’s student management system.This was an extremely important decision, since STAS stores all the data on NKI students,tutors, courses, exams, grades, wages, fees, etc. With the integration of SESAM and STASwe could maintain only one set of data and therefore reduce manual registration and errors.We could also automatically provide users with more sophisticated services such as onlineregistration and presentation of grades, teacher remuneration, and exam registration.

NKI has a number of self-developed and commercial applications that together make upa comprehensive system83 for student support services. Integration of the systems isextremely important for the total functionality, effectiveness, and quality of student supportservices. As shown in Figure 22, STAS is the pivotal master system that holds the core datathat many of the other systems depend on.

The backbone of an efficient large-scale distance teaching institution is the computersystem for administering students. STAS, NKI’s self-developed student management systemhas for many years been developed to satisfy the needs of a large-scale institution, includ-ing registration of assignments, monitoring student progression, distributing new learningmaterials, and paying tutors.

STAS was initially developed for correspondence courses and bar code registration ofassignments. Initially it was not suited to serving online students, as there were no connec-tions between the Internet systems and the administrative systems. As a joke, we said that itwas inconvenient that e-mail did not come with bar codes. So, it was necessary to developSTAS further to handle online students efficiently.


83 Truls Fagerberg has made important contributions to this description of NKI’s student support system.

Figure 22. NKI’s integrated systems for online student support

STAS is NKI’s self-developed student management system. It holds all relevant data aboutstudents, teachers, courses and study programs. One of the largest advantages with STASis that it is developed to handle students with individual starting-time and progression. Italso provides excellent tools for generating various reports and statistics. STAS is NKI’smaster system and it is integrated with all other essential systems such as accounting,logistic, prospective and partner systems. STAS is also the master system for NKI’s LMSsystem (SESAM) and business portal (FEB).

Agresso (www.agresso.com) is a commercial accounting system that handles tuition fees,invoices, wages, etc. When a course enrollment is registered in STAS, the correspondingstudent account is debited in Agresso. When tutors register grades in SESAM, they aretransferred to STAS and the remuneration is added to their accounts in Agresso.

SYSA is a system NKI has developed to present information about local partners thatorganize face-to-face classes based on NKI’s distance education courses. It provides con-tact information about local partners and the classes they offer for NKI courses. SYSA sup-ports local partners’ marketing and student recruitment. The partners’ contact information isforwarded to STAS.

Onyx is a commercial system that is purchased to handle marketing activities andrequests from prospective students. Each advertisement, brochure, TV commercial, Webcampaign etc. is identified with a unique media code. The advertisements result in thou-sands of requests that are registered with contact information and media code. Therequests may come via NKI’s website, telephone, e-mail etc. from people who areconsidering enrolling on a course. Onyx is also used to follow up prospective students whohave showed their interest, but never enrolled on a course. Onyx has access to STAS data


www.nettskolen.com

www.nki.no

www.agresso.com

so that it knows which prospective students actually enroll on a course. As a result of this,Onyx provides a number of reports and follow-up services for the marketing department.

Multi-Case is a commercial logistics system for administration of purchases and shipmentsof textbooks and miscellaneous physical course material. When course enrollments are reg-istered in STAS, Multi-Case automatically initiates shipment of the corresponding coursematerial. It also provides a number of reports about royalties, material in stock etc.

SESAM (Scalable Educational System for Administration and Maintenance) is NKI’s self-developed LMS system. It is developed to support the services that are important to NKI,and it is therefore well adapted to NKI’s special needs. SESAM is developed for large-scale online education and it applies state-of-the-art Web technologies including Java, XML,XSL, Oracle 9i databases and Apache Web servers. SESAM is excellent for handlingcontinuous student enrollment 365 days a year. The major additional advantages it hascompared to commercial LMS systems, is its focus on cost-effectiveness and the necessaryintegration with all the critical student support systems. SESAM provides a number ofservices for students. Among them are:

■ Access control■ Personalization of user-interfaces and services■ Access to course content and assignments■ Discussion forums■ Class lists■ Student presentations■ Information on exams and grades■ Course evaluation

The teachers have access to additional services such as:

■ Online registration of grades■ Tutor support services■ Wage and payment data

NKI employees also have access to a number of additional reports and statistics on infor-mation about course enrollments, user statistics, course evaluations etc.

FEB is a self-developed business portal, which NKI launched September 16, 2002. It isthe main portal for the NKI online course catalog (www.nki.no). It presents all courses andprograms offered by NKI. This includes information on course content, necessary prerequi-sites, credits, exams, tuition fees, etc. Prospective students may register or apply to coursesdirectly via FEB. The introduction of FEB seems to have had a very positive effect on theincrease of unique users and prospective students. The number of unique users that visitedwww.nki.no increased from 37,372 in January 2002 to 60,166 in January 2003. Similarly, the number of registered prospective students increased from 5,305 in January2002 to 6,531 in January 2003.


www.nki.no

www.nki.no

In addition to course information, FEB also includes a comprehensive database of arti-cles with news, frequently asked questions, and more general information on distance andonline education. A number of research articles and reports are also available in FEB. Italso provides a search engine covering the course catalog, www.nki.no andwww.nettskolen.com. FEB is built on current Web technologies including Java, XML, XSL,Oracle 9i database and Apache Web server.

In February 2003, FEB for the first time automatically provided the course informationused in the printed course catalog. For the first time, it was also possible to order theprinted course catalogue via SMS-messages from a mobile telephone.

Consequences and ImplicationsThe process of converting the organization to online course and program delivery has hada number of consequences. Whether these have been intended or unintended is largely aquestion of timing, as unintended consequences at one time may be intended or actually, ifnegative, be reduced or removed by counteraction at a later stage.

Costs of Online DeliveryWhile NKI believes that online delivery of distance learning programs, when handled com-petently, using pedagogically sound practices, should imply a more satisfactory study expe-rience and better learning than correspondence-based individual distance learning, untilnow NKI has charged the same fees for both modalities. At the same time, online studentsappear to have higher expectations of service quality, and quantity and quality of commu-nication with their tutors. While earlier distance learning systems had high front-end costs,which could be compensated for by lower delivery costs in large-scale systems, it seemsthat high-quality online learning might have both high front-end costs and high deliverycosts. Thus, it is a challenge to find ways of reducing either development costs or tutorcosts. We have not yet found a solution to this problem. During the first generations ofonline delivery we had the working hypothesis that less emphasis could be put on the pre-production phase of courses. In our experience, this is not a correct assumption if we wantthe students to be satisfied.

Parallel VersionsTo stay in business, we have had to offer courses in two parallel versions. This has madecourse development and student support more labor intensive and expensive. Further, asmany of the courses are also offered in a “combined education” model, we may also havedistance students in local face-to-face classes who have access to the Internet and studentswho have not. This situation has been difficult to organize both administratively and peda-gogically. Thus, online delivery to combined education students has been a problem, and ithas been difficult to satisfy the needs of both student groups.


www.nettskolen.com

www.nki.no

Tutor Recruitment, Tutor Workload, and Tutor SatisfactionNKI Distance Education only engages part-time tutors, and online delivery required recruit-ment of new tutors. Some of the senior correspondence tutors have not been interested inonline tutoring. On the other hand, online delivery has attracted new groups to distancetutoring. Some online tutors find this way of teaching especially exciting and rewarding. Toprepare new tutors, NKI has for many years offered an obligatory training course. Begin-ning in 2000 this course is being offered only online. Thus, tutor training is a necessaryelement in the process of converting to online delivery. NKI has at any one time some 50prospective tutors in the tutor training course. Because tutor workload is generally perceivedto be heavy in online education (see, for example, Paulsen, 1998), it has been difficult insome subjects to recruit competent tutors and to develop pedagogical solutions and admin-istrative software to rationalize and ease the workload for online tutors.

Research, Funding, Marketing Effects and Academic ContactsAs NKI has been an entrepreneurial institution in online delivery of distance learning pro-grams, it has been a necessity to engage in field research. By attracting external fundingfrom national and international bodies, the research activities made it easier to recruit com-petent personnel, led to co-operative engagements with national academic and researchinstitutions, and made us an attractive partner in a number of national and EU projects(e.g., specifically concerning survey, analysis and evaluation of online learning). Seewww.nki.no/in_english.xsql. It has also given positive publicity through published articles,research reports, conference papers and media coverage.

Twelve Reasons for NKI’s SuccessIt is not possible to isolate a few important causes for the relative success of the NKI InternetCollege. It is probably more correct to claim that NKI has made many sensible choicesand few major mistakes. However, the twelve causes presented in List 9 have all con-tributed to the success.

List 9. Twelve reasons for NKI’s success

1. NKI is an institution with high competence in both distance education andinformation technology. Both competencies have been pivotal for the develop-ment of online education.

2. Some NKI enthusiasts have always believed in online education and overmany years made invaluable contributions to the Internet College.

3. NKI has been careful to only adopt standard and widely-used technology. Thispractice enables students to apply the software and hardware they have attheir disposal with little need to buy additional equipment.


www.nki.no/in_english.xsql

4. Students’ time flexibility has always been a focal point for NKI. It has been com-mitted to asynchronous communication and deliberately avoided synchronouscommunication technologies. Communication should take place when it suits thestudent, not the institution.

5. After some years experience with paced courses starting twice a year, NKImade a strategic choice to focus on individual start-up and progression. Thechoice was based on student surveys, much internal discussion, and pilotcourses that showed increasing enrollment. Hence, NKI students may start acourse whenever they want and follow their individual pace of progression.

6. Tuition fees pay for development and operation of NKI courses, so NKI has toprovide cost-effective courses. The focus is on much learning for the money.

7. The Department of Research and Development has conducted continuousresearch and evaluation of online education, and has accumulated knowledgeand competence in online education. In addition, the Department has conductedor participated in a number of R&D projects financed externally by Norwegianand European governmental sources.

8. NKI is flexible, with little rigidity compared to public colleges. It has a numberof times shown that it is capable of rapid adjustment. The employees haveshown the ability to detect new trends and adapt to the changing market. Thismay be due to the fact that NKI has continuous enrollment and therefore experi-ences changes in market demands earlier than institutions that offer enrollmentonly once or twice a year.

9. NKI covers a wide range of subjects and levels. It is not dependent on havingin-house competence in all subject areas; it has a long tradition of collabora-tion with other educational institutions and engaging faculty from other institu-tions to participate in the development and teaching of courses.

10.NKI has over many years developed high credibility with the government andpublic administration. It has been committed to achieving approval for publiccredits, certificates, and student loans.

11.NKI has chosen not to separate the Internet College from the Department ofDistance Education. It has deliberately chosen to gradually enhance the onlineeducation competence for all employees in the Distance Education Depart-ment.

12.NKI has continuously focused on evolutionary development of the Internet Col-lege and the administrative systems that support it. Consequently, NKI has hadmore effective administrative systems than its competitors and at the same timepeople with high competence on these systems.


And Twelve Challenges for the FutureWe consider that we have had reasonable success in transforming NKI from a traditionaldistance teaching institution to an institution adapted to deliver Internet-based distance edu-cation. But we still face a number of challenges. The issues listed below are among themost important issues that still remain unresolved or are only partially resolved:

1. The importance of effective quality management increases as the number of courses,tutors and student grows. Arbitrary and ad hoc evaluations are not sufficient to securehigh quality, so more systematic and continuous systems and schemes for qualitymanagement must be implemented.

2. It is important to further develop teaching methods and strategies to fully exploit thepossibilities of the Internet. We have still much to learn about how to design online pro-grams. Online learning activities must be designed to achieve optimal outcomes fordifferent kinds of learners in diverse subjects with various aims and objectives.

3. Satisfying both the individual student’s need for flexibility and needs for collaborativelearning in a social group is a great challenge. It is especially important to developteaching techniques that facilitate cooperative learning in unpaced courses.

4. Too many students seldom or never access NKI’s web pages. However they may stillbe successful students since much of the work can be done by reading textbooks andcommunicating via e-mail with the tutor. They can also follow the discussion forms, sinceall messages are forwarded via e-mail.

5. The large number of courses, students, and discussion forums result in vibrant activity insome areas of the online colleges. In other areas, there are few enrolled students, usersthat seldom log on, and courses that are being phased out or even discontinued. Theseareas remind us more of ghost towns. To handle this, NKI needs to carry out a numberof activities that have been termed Operation Ghost Busters.

6. Soon, most of the NKI distance education income will come from online activities. Thenwe can gradually terminate some increasingly redundant offline activities and hencerationalize the operation. We can also require all teachers to work online and with thatimprove the overall quality of our online systems and services.

7. Still, most of NKI’s income comes from individual students, but a growing number ofcorporations and organizations are writing tenders for online education. These tendersrequire much work and development of additional online services. But NKI has a port-folio of courses, advanced student support services, and an efficient organization thatmakes it well suited to become a comprehensive provider of online education servicesfor corporations and organizations.

8. We need to search for better solutions concerning tutors’ functions and workload. Thetutor costs can easily become higher than allowed by the fees charged.

9. Students expect online learning material to include multimedia elements. So, there is aneed to find ways of developing multimedia material that is both learning-efficient andcost-effective.


10.We still need to refine the SESAM LMS system, the STAS student management system,and the integration between them and all other systems for online student support.

11.Most tender invitations today require general adherence to e-learning standards. Thestandards are however very comprehensive, and it is probably a waste of resources toimplement many of them. The challenge is therefore to find a balanced approach toimplementing standards that are beneficial and cost-effective.

12.NKI is increasingly dependent on online services. This makes the operation vulnerableto technological disruptions and problems. We have experienced a disturbing growth ofvirus attacks, spam messages, commercials, and other unwanted elements that maycause serious problems for online education and reduce the future usability of the Internet.

ReferencesHilz, S. R. 1986. The virtual classroom. Building the foundations. New Jersey: New JerseyInstitute of Technology.

Ljoså, E. & Rekkedal, T. 1993. From external control to internal quality assurance. Back-ground for the development of NADE’s quality standards for distance education. Oslo:NADE. Retrieved December 6, 2000. (www.nettskolen.com/pub/?artid=121)

NADE 1996. Quality standards. (The Norwegian Association for Distance Education).Oslo: NADE. Retrieved December 6, 2000. (www.nettskolen.com/pub/?artid=122)

NKI 1997. Motorvei til morgendagen. Plan for utnyttelse av Internett i fjernundervisning1997-98 – fra eksperimentelle småskalaforsøk til industriell storskaladrift. [internal document].

NKI 1999. Strategic plan 2000-2002. Bekkestua: NKI. [internal document].

Paulsen, M. F. 1987. In search of a virtual school. Technological Horizons in EducationJournal, 15(5), 71-76.

Paulsen, M. F. 1989. En virtuell skole. Del I. Fundamentet i EKKO-prosjektet. Bekkestua:NKI/SEFU.

Paulsen, M. F. 1992. The NKI Electronic College: Five years of computer conferencing indistance education. Deosnews, 2(9).(www.ed.psu.edu/acsde/deos/deosnews/deosnews2_9.asp)

Paulsen, M. F. 1995. The NKI Open Electronic College. In D. Sewart (ed.) One worldmany voices: quality in open and distance learning. Selected papers from the 17th WorldConference of the International Council for Distance Education, Birmingham, UnitedKingdom, 26-30 June 1995. http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten/artikler/birmingham_foredrag.html

Paulsen, M. F. 1998. Teaching Techniques for Computer-Mediated Communication.(Doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 1998). Dissertation Abstracts Inter-national, A 60/01, AAT 9915916.

Paulsen, M. F. & Rekkedal, T. 1988. Computer conferencing: A breakthrough in distancelearning, or just another technological gadget? In D. Sewart & J. S. Daniel (Eds.),Developing distance education (pp. 362-365). Oslo: ICDE.


www.nettskolen.com/pub/?artid=121

www.nettskolen.com/pub/?artid=122


http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten/artikler/birmingham_foredrag.html

http://home.nettskolen.com/~morten/artikler/birmingham_foredrag.html

Paulsen, M. F. & Rekkedal, T. 2001. The NKI Internet College: A Review of 15 YearsDelivery of 10,000 Online Courses. The International Review of Research in Open andDistance Learning, 1(2). (www.irrodl.org).

Rekkedal, T. 1990. Recruitment and study barriers in the Electronic College. In M. F.Paulsen & T. Rekkedal (Eds.), The Electronic College. Selected articles from the EKKOProject (pp. 79-105). Bekkestua: NKI/SEFU.

Rekkedal, T. 1993. Practice related research in large scale distance education, Experi-ences and challenges. In Research in Distance Education – Present situation and forecasts.Umeå: University of Umeå, Sweden.

Rekkedal, T. 1998. Quality assessment and evaluation. Basic philosophies, concepts andpractices at NKI, Norway. In H. Rathore & R. Schuemer (Eds.), Evaluation concepts andpractices in selected distance education institutions. ZIFF-papiere 108. Hagen: FernUniver-sität. Retrieved December 6, 2000. (www.fernuni-hagen.de/ZIFF/rekked.htm)


www.irrodl.org

www.fernuni-hagen.de/ZIFF/rekked.htm

TRENDS AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS

The current mega trend shows clearly that online education is shifting from small-scaleexperiments to large-scale operations. (Page 317)

The analysis shows that there is an obvious request for additional bandwidth and bettermultimedia abilities. (Page 301)

All are evolutionary developments that were visible 15 years ago and not really hard topredict. The only really revolutionary development in online education during this periodwas the introduction of the Web. This technological development, which nobody foresaw,emerged as the development with the largest impact on online education. (Page 314)

Even though we have experienced tremendous developments in online education duringthe last 15 years, it is interesting to observe that written communication, perhaps the mostimportant part of online teaching and learning, has not changed much. Most communica-tion still consists of plain text, and the time it takes to turn on the computer, receive e-mailand compose messages has not been reduced. (Page 315)

The recent development in speech synthesis has made it so understandable and user-friendly that more learners may benefit from it. These include blind students, dyslecticstudents, and students who for example spend much time in a car. It is conceivable that inthe future it would be just as easy and inexpensive to “speech” a text as it is to print it.(Page 321)

…campus-based students are increasingly voting with their mouse and taking significantparts of their undergraduate degrees online from other institutions. (Page 331)

Part Four

Figure 23. Industrialized online education

Online education becomes mainstream education in Scandinavia. Before year 2000,typical universities piloted a few online courses with some pioneering students. Today,many higher education institutions are implementing online education services to all theirstudents. Even primary schools offer online services to many teachers, students, andparents. This illustrates that the current mega trend in online education is the transition fromsmall-scale experiments to large-scale operations. Still, few institutions can claim that theprovision of Web-based courses has been an economic success. So, to obtain a soundeconomy for large-scale operation, some sort of industrialization of online education mustbe considered.



www.studymentor.com

Potential LMS Improvements

AbstractThis article presents an analysis of the answers the Web-edu project team membersreceived when they asked 113 experts in 17 European countries what features they wouldlike to see included in their future LMS systems. The analysis indicates that there is:

1. a need for better integration between LMS systems and other related systems,2. an interest in standardization of content and tools that could be applied in online education,3. a request for local presence, language support, and special characters,4. a concern about cost-effectiveness,5. an urge for multimedia and broadband capacity,6. a potential for improvements with regard to tests, assignments, and evaluations,7. a request for improved communication and collaboration tools,8. a need for better administrative tools,9. a potential for simpler and more user-friendly solutions,

10. a request for more flexible systems,11. an interest in mobile learning and e-commerce,12. a request for better systems for content management and development,13. a wish for systems with more features.

Features of ImportanceWhat features would you like to see included in your LMS system in the future? This was thelast question asked in an in-depth interview with 113 experts in 17 European countries,and this article presents an analysis of the answer to the question. The analysis wasconducted in 2001 and 2002 within the framework of the European Commission Web-edu Project (www.nettskolen.com/in_english/webedusite/index.html).

About 80 of the 113 interviewees answered this question. It was the last question in alengthy interview, and some of the interviewees had not enough time or stamina to answerthis question. But there were also a few interviewees who explicitly stated that they had nospecial request for future features or that they had not sufficiently explored the system torequest additional features:




www.studymentor.com

No special requests, although we do make feature requests from time to time viathe manufacturer’s web site. [Great British university using WebCT]

The program was not sufficiently explored, therefore, we don’t have the neces-sary elements to identify new characteristics. [Portuguese non-profit associationusing WebCT]

Nevertheless, the answers revealed many interesting issues that are presented and dis-cussed in the following. The themes that emerged as important through the analysis were:

1. Better systems integration2. Interest in standardization3. Local presence, language support, and special characters4. Concern about cost-effectiveness5. Multimedia and broadband urge6. Tests, assignments, and evaluations7. Improved communication and collaboration8. Better administrative tools9. Simpler user solutions

10. More flexible systems11. Interest in mobile learning and e-commerce12. Content management and development13. Additional features

Better Systems IntegrationMany interviewees wanted better integration between the LMS systems and various othersystems and services. Some claimed that there was a need for integration in general terms:

Integration with other systems. [Portuguese private university using TWT]Fundamentally, the issue regarding integrated management of all manage-

ment/organization mechanisms of the course, mainly in the dematerializedenvironment of a course, in the perspective system administrator, so as to allow aglobal reading of the course. Integrated management system capable ofmonitoring. [Portuguese public university using WebCT]

Better import of already completed supports from other resources /environ-ments. [Czech university department using Tutor2000]

The universities and colleges were concerned about integration with the student manage-ment systems that usually contain the central student databases with student records, exami-nation results, fees etc. Some institutions also wanted integrated online payment systems.

The integration with MSTAS should be carried through. [Norwegian college # 6using Classfronter]



Integration with other systems – student records, examinations, photos, moresecurity, faster speeds. [Northwestern European institute of technology using Black-Board]

Staff/Institution integration re enrollments etc. [Northwestern European instituteof further and higher education using BlackBoard]

A possibility to integrate our self-developed materials as separate additionalmaterials to the official ones. A possibility of connection/link of own student data-base to central student database. [Czech technical university using GLN – GlobalLearning Network]

I would like to see an integrated system for registration of examinations, onlinepayment, and that FC became 100% integrated with the Web so that we don’tneed to use the client software. [Danish consortium using First Class]

And the companies focused on integration with their human relation management systemsand competency management systems:

It is necessary to improve the tool. The features to introduce are the managementof competencies and the integration with Centra platform. [Portuguese privatecompany using Intralearn and Centra]

Formare will evolve into an LMS with a lot of potential in training managementintegrated with HR management. [Portuguese private company using Formare]

A Norwegian distance education institution mentioned the need for better integration withthe online course catalogue that it uses for marketing and with automatic tracking of text-book shipment:

I would like to see better integration between SESAM and the NKI Distance Edu-cation online course catalogue that is used for marketing of the courses. I hope toinclude a user-friendly system for online payment of tuition fees, and an automaticsystem that allows students to track the shipment of the textbooks that we sendthem. [Norwegian distance education institution using self-developed LMS]

Finally, it seems that some of the services within the LMS systems could be better integrated:

The document archive and the discussion groups should be more integrated.Today, you have to quit one function to enter the other. [Norwegian college # 6using Classfronter]

P O T E N T I A L L M S I M P R O V E M E N T S


Interest in StandardizationThe analysis indicates that there is an interest in standards and standardization that mightmake it easier to exchange content and data between LMS systems and between LMSsystems and other systems. Some of the interviewees spoke of the importance of standardi-zation in general terms:

Compliance with LMS standards in order to integrate 3rd party Web-based CBTmaterials. [Northwestern European institute of technology using WebCT]

In the future, I hope we will have less complex LMS systems with better solu-tions for exchange of data between other systems. [Norwegian semi-privateprovider of primary education using FirstClass]

Many were concerned about the possibility to use, import, and export standardized coursecontent and learning objects:

Dynamic course change options. Continued support for macs. Ability to success-fully import and export IMS content packages. [Northwestern European furthereducation college using FDL Learning Environment]

My vision is that colleges should not become providers of standard products.We have to focus on flexibility and adapt to the users’ needs. We should focus onareas in which we have special competence. We should also focus on standardi-zation so that course content could be shared and recycled. [Norwegian educa-tional company using Classfronter and CourseKeeper]

In the future, I would like to have better course development tools and moreflexible competence inventory tools. Further, I would like to see systems that arebetter at exchanging learning units between courses, programs and companies.[Norwegian educational company using Saba]

Standardization for the reuse of contents/activities... more in the perspective ofactivities... [Portuguese private university using TWT]

Standards for distribution of content should be further developed. [Norwegianprivate college using BlackBoard]

Two German experts spoke about the importance of XML and metatagging:To extend the possibilities to import whole modules or courses developed on xml-basis and furnished with metadata. Options to communicate externally and intro-duction of external tools. [German faculty of university using self-developed LMS]

At the moment, we want to build up the options provided by metatagging.This is important for future development in the learning area. The system is xml-based, and we want to have an improved capacity for reworking the graphicside of our material. [German company #2 using self-developed LMS]



And many references were made to specifications and initiatives concerning standardssuch as SCORM, IMS, AICC and IEEE:

In the future, the import and export of courses on the basis of standards ofSCORM, improvement of internal e-mail functions, and course structuring withinthe LMS should be more flexible. We chose this product because it is possible towork on its further development together with the company. [German universityconsortium using Clix campus]

We want an improved function in regard to SCORM. [Norwegian universityusing Classfronter]

We see no alternative when comparing with other systems in the synchronousarea. It would be nice to see diverse standards being established, which wouldbe possible if quality criteria could be set up, and technical interfaces defined,i.e. AICC, but this is a very broadly-based standard, and seems to be hardlyusable. [German public-private partner using DLS from ETS]

In the LMS market in general I would like to see standards implemented morerigorously, for example more compliance with standards such as SCORM andAICC. Big companies such as Macromedia and Microsoft demonstrated tools thatwill enable easy creation of SCORM-compliant learning objects. It is important tokeep up with future developments. One of the main criticisms is summed up byClark Aldrich: “LMSs fail to track a surprisingly large number of self-paced formallearning options, including books, magazines, conferences, meetings andspeeches, mentoring and apprenticeship programs, and such group projects asdesigning a new product or helping a company develop a new marketing plan.”This applies to our LMS also. [Northwestern European company using Visit]

Global tracking of students, and cross-course e-mailing, and further movementtowards IMS/IEEE specs. [Great British university college using WebCT]The vendor should include SCORM compatibility (it’s promised for the nextrelease). More synchronous interfaces- for example we would like to include thenormal Net-meeting, more interfaces for the courses. [German technical universityusing BlackBoard]



Local Presence, Language Support, and Special CharactersThe analysis indicates that there is a request for local representatives and nationallanguage versions. Some of the systems don’t meet these needs very well:

Czech localization. [Czech university department using Tutor2000]Bb suffers from a lack of ‘real estate’. This will be addressed in V6.0.

American English discontinued in favor of British English. [Northwestern Europeanfurther education college using BlackBoard]

Italian version. [Italian university using BlackBoard]Most teachers want to have an Icelandic interface. WebCT itself does notpromote translations. We translated version 2 to Icelandic, but that translationcannot be used in version 3. [Icelandic vocational collage with distanceeducation department using WebCT]

Some interviewees also focused on insufficient support for various alphabets that areneeded in language courses and special characters that are used in mathematics andchemistry courses:

We have a number of foreign language courses such as Russian and Arabic thatare hard to teach online because of difficulties in using their special characters.[Swedish university using Ping Pong]

A problem that is more related to the web than to WebCT itself is the problemof writing mathematical formulas. Without better ways of writing these formulas, itis hard to teach mathematics and chemistry online. [Icelandic vocational collegewith distance education department using WebCT]

Concern about Cost-effectivenessA few interviewees were concerned about improving cost-effectiveness and lack ofnecessary financial resources:

Just hope to have more financial resources to encourage the current stagnantsituation. [Czech independent institution using self-developed LMS]

It does not necessarily need any new features. Possibilities for system inte-gration could be useful but in my opinion the development of this platform hasreached the point where the long-term cost-effectiveness is more important thanany possible new feature. [Finnish university #2 using WebCT]

Finally, I would like to see more national and international collaboration,especially among institutions in Scandinavia. In my opinion, it is important tocollaborate, since it is very expensive to develop online courses. [Danish universityusing BlackBoard]



Multimedia and Broadband UrgeThe analysis shows that there is an obvious request for additional bandwidth and bettermultimedia abilities:

In the future, I would like to see that all users have more bandwidth so that we canprovide more advanced multimedia material. [Danish distance education centerusing TopClass]

Support for creation of education multimedia materials. [Czech universitydepartment using Tutor2000]

More user support, more multimedia support. [Slovak association using self-developed LMS]

We would like to use moving pictures and voice, so that the students could sitby their private computers and participate in teaching lessons in real-time (Webcamera). [Norwegian college #2 using Classfronter]

Classfronter should have the possibility to use streaming technology, because thatwould make it easier to publish multimedia. [Norwegian college #4 using Classfron-ter]

We want a simplified system for transfer of small voice files. Today the transferis done outside the LMS, and presupposes there is a tape player on the clientcomputer. The files must be compressed to mp3 format, one can hardly escapefrom that work. [Norwegian college #8 using Classfronter]

I want a simple function for compression of voice in connection with PowerPoint or other presentation programs. [Norwegian college # 6 using Classfronter]

Dual voice and pictures when using broadband, so that you can see the oneyou are collaborating with. This would make demonstrations of practical skills viaa Web camera possible. [Norwegian college using IT’s Learning]

Several interviewees wanted to include video services such as streaming video, video-conferences, Web cameras, and moving pictures. Audio services such as voice communi-cation and audio files were also requested:

The possibility to apply more demanding technologies (Streaming video, video-conferences etc.) - it depends mainly on the quality of the technical equipment atthe client’s workstation. [Czech company using Tutor2000]

There is no need for transferring moving images in real-time today, but theremight be in the future. [Norwegian college #8 using Classfronter]

We would like a system for transferring small voice files within the LMS. Todaysuch transfer is done outside the LMS, and requires a recorder on the client com-puter. It takes some work to compress the files to mp2 format, but perhaps thatwork is unavoidable in any case. [Norwegian college #8 using Classfronter]

I would like to see better and more interactive course content in the future.I would also like to see more and better synchronous communication. We have



done some experiments with video-conferences, which also could be available asstreamed files. I hope that we can have future use of Web cameras and betterintegration of audio and moving pictures. [Danish university using BlackBoard]

It is mainly to guarantee an authorized access into the courses and to secure areliable functionality of the system. Furthermore the system should have variousintegrated possibilities for online communication (chat, video, sharing, voicecommunication). [Slovak university using Tutot2000]

A technology for streaming. A connection to external databases also from asingle-server version of the system. [Czech technical university using WebCT]

I would like to have some user-friendly audio tools integrated in WebCT sothat we did not need to use additional audio tools to handle audio files. [Swedishuniversity using WebCT]

Some of the interviewees especially focused on multimedia tools such as video-conferencing and voice chat for better synchronous communication:

We would like to have real-time video-conference: we will install this within thenext 12 months. [German company using Learnlink evoeye]

In the future, I would like to see better voice chat and video-conferencingservices – useful for end users with limitation of ISDN-connections. [Danishconsortium using self-developed LMS]

First, I would like to have better tools for synchronous communication, whichincludes video capabilities. Second I hope that we will have better integrationwith external tools and services such as for example multimedia tools. Third, Iwant a more open data structure in FC. [Danish university center using FirstClass]

Tests, Assignments, and EvaluationsThe analysis indicates that several LMS systems should improve their test and assignmenttools:

Improvement of question and testing formats. [Northwestern European furthereducation college using WebCT]

One could think of an enlargement of this system in the direction of morecourses and including tests and assignment system from other faculties. [Germancompany #1 using self-developed LMS]

They could also be improved with regard to evaluation, e-portfolio, commenting on studentpresentations, management of competencies, assessment tools, and reports:

The possibility to be trained in evaluation and certification matters. [Italian uppersecondary school using First Class]



E-portfolio, easier system for commenting student presentations and easier filemanagement, connection to university student management system. [Finnish univer-sity #1 using WebCT]

Management of competencies. Better engine for assessment tools construction.Possibility for better content construction. [Portuguese non-profit private institutionusing Learning Space]

More advanced assessment system of the reports linked to the statistics etc. Functio-nal improvement of the dictionary of terms…[Slovak e-learning center using Intralearn]

Improved Communication and CollaborationMany interviewees were concerned about the need for better and more advanced commu-nication and collaboration tools. Two simply stated that they wanted better communicationpossibilities and protected communication:

Better communication possibilities. [Czech technical university department usingTutor2000]

Protected communication in all ways to be implemented into the LMS. [Czechuniversity using Tutor2000]Others requested better support and more tools for teamwork and collaboration:

Better support for teamwork. [Czech college using WebCT]We would like to develop in the field of collaboration, for example E-mail, live-

collaboration, or chat-lines for students. We have a good content-managementsystem, a good LMS and a good author environment. We lack collaboration toolsin the first phase. [German company using Learning solution]

I would like to have a NetMeeting-client installed in Classfronter. [Norwegiancollege #4 using Classfronter]

We want to have the possibility to invite for example 3 students to create aroom within the ordinary classroom, in order to avoid so many rooms. Today, wecan invite them to a folder, but we can’t create a discussion forum within a folder.[Norwegian college #3 using Classfronter]

In addition, some especially focused on the need for better tools for synchronous communi-cation and immediate feed-back:

I should like the chat function to be displayed in a separate window. So that wecould open the chat function while other tools are in use. [Norwegian college #1using Classfronter]

Better communication tools. What is missing in our release are synchronous com-munication tools. We had to integrate compatible software for e-mail and forum. Thisaspect should be improved. [Italian non-profit training organization using Greenteam]



I would like to have better tools for synchronous communication. For examplebetter chat functions that allow moderators to control the sequence of contributors.[Swedish university using Luvit]

Synchronous communication. [Czech university department using Tutor2000]Only that the tools for synchronous work become a little more refined.

[German public teacher training institution using interwise-ecp]What we miss is the possibility of providing immediate feed-back, but this

aspect goes beyond technological limitations. [Italian non-profit training organiza-tion using Greenteam]

Better Administrative ToolsThere is a general need for better administrative systems and tools. The analysis shows thatmany systems could have better tools for administration of students, tutors, and content:

The administrative tools could have been better. [Norwegian distance educationinstitution using Luvit]

The administration of the system is not good enough. Imagine 5,000 users andyou are going to find out to which subjects a student has access privilege to while allstudents are in a pile (flat database). [Norwegian college #10 using Classfronter]

We are developing a better system of administration of participants andresources. [German technical university using BlackBoard]

Students should have more administrative privileges within their own groups.[Norwegian private college using BlackBoard]

More attentive environment for the student, as well as for the teacher. [Czechuniversity department using Tutor2000]

The interviewees asked for better group management tools, student record systems,improved course management, and better password management facilities:

I would like to include: db students, further group management tools to betterdivide users, better articulated statistics (one per class, alphabetical order); thepossibility to work directly on course development without the need of usingdream river. [Italian institution using Esperienze]

Full enrollment and student record system. [Northern Irish further and highereducation college using IT Campus]

Tools for vertically-structured course management (courses with more levels ofmodules, chapters and sections). [Czech company using Aspen]

It would be good to have even better facilities to put links, to change pass-words etc., probably some interfaces or plug-ins or to have a better overview ofactivities. [German technical university using self-developed LMS]



Some interviewees more specifically wanted better services for student tracking andreporting functions:

We would like some form of student tracking integrated with the system. [North-western European university using Intranets]

It is difficult to find out whether a student is active or not. [Norwegian college#10 using Classfronter]

More reporting functions. [German company using Corporate learning]I want to know how many who have downloaded a certain document.

[Norwegian college #10 using Classfronter]More control over the intervention of students, what was the participation of

the student... how long does each student spend on each service. [Portugueseprivate university using TWT]

A special view telling you that you are logged on to this college. [Norwegiancollege using IT’s Learning]

Simpler User SolutionsSeveral interviewees indicated that systems might be too complex for someapplications. They requested simpler and user-friendlier solutions for teachers andadministrators:

TopClass should be easier to get on with for teachers. [Norwegian college usingTopClass]

The metaphors concerning the administration of the system are too difficult. It isdifficult to get a good enough mental picture of how the administration of theprogram works. [Norwegian college #2 using Classfronter]

We plan to open up the system so that it may become easier for other peopleto use the platform, we want to reduce service-work. We want to develop a kindof a trading place for architecture projects where you might find a counselorand/or fellows. [German university consortium using self-developed LMS]

In the Top Class system I would like to see a much shorter run-up time for thetutors: something simpler - an easier path from beginners to improvers toadvanced. Many of my colleagues were put off in the beginning. They wereblocked from having their notes in Word entered into the Top Class system.[Northwestern European institute of technology #2 using TopClass]

Luvit provides many more opportunities and features than we actually can orneed to include. However, in the future we would like to see a feature that allowsus to cut and past in Luvit and we would also like to utilize the online communi-cation tools much more. [Swedish company using Luvit]



One interviewee wanted shortcuts for more efficient use:

There are few possibilities of shortcuts in the execution of tasks in Luvit. For thoseof us accustomed to Luvit, shortcuts would have been convenient. [Norwegiancollege using Luvit]

Some Nordic interviewees also pointed out the need for easy access to suppliers anddevelopers:

It ought to be easier to get through to the supplier with proposals for improve-ments. [Norwegian college using TopClass]

Actually, I would like to make some things simpler to use logically and techni-cally. As I belong to a group that is developing Profiler and its new versions, thereis a direct way to development. [Finnish university using LC Profiler]

More Flexible SystemsA few of the interviewees especially pointed out that they wanted more flexible solutionsbecause they felt too dependent on the systems’ intrinsic structure and design. Oneespecially wanted better control of graphical design, logos, etc. Another would like tohave access to the system’s source code:

I would like to be able to structure information in Luvit in other ways such asaccording to mind maps. In my opinion, Luvit only allows us to follow theWindows file structure. [Swedish university using Luvit]

I would like to see a more flexible system. We sometimes feel too dependenton Boxer’s structure and thinking. [Norwegian private secondary school usingCourseKeeper]

There should be a greater degree of flexibility to grant privileges to teachers aswell, not just to the system administrator. [Norwegian college #10 using Class-fronter]

We want to design the user interface with the layout we want, and decidewhich information shall be available and also possibility to place pictures wherethe news are. Some of this is possible, but not to such a degree as we want. Wewould also like to see easier administration of users and courses. And finally achance for enclosures to the contributions in the discussion forum. [Norwegiancollege #4 using Classfronter]

Some teachers want more control of the design elements so that they couldpersonalize the course with a special graphic design, logos, etc. [Swedishuniversity using Luvit]

I should like the source code in TopClass to be open. [Norwegian collegeusing TopClass]



Interest in Mobile Learning and E-commerceOne interviewee wanted enhanced mobile services so that users could utilize mobilephones and PDAs to access the LMS systems. Another was interested in wireless access tothe system:

Right now we want to enhance mobile aspects of the system, right now you maylog in via mobiles for changes of dates, news, addresses, counseling hours, tele-phone numbers etc. We are going, though, to include transparencies in pda for-mats together with audio files and offer these parts of learning material via WAPso you may learn e.g. on the train. There are AVANT-GO channels worked outwhere you can download parts to your pda – also the part for FAQs has beendeveloped. [German university using self-developed LMS]

Wireless access to the system. As far as we know, the contractor is working onthis. [Norwegian private college using BlackBoard]

Some interviewees wanted tools for online invoicing, e-shopping, and fee payment:

Invoicing online. [Spanish university using Elias]Virtual projects, e-shopping, searching by keywords. [German distance educa-

tion institution using self-developed LMS]The possibility/provision of enrollment and fee payment to be within the

system. We would like to use this form (by means of LMS) to offer paid coursesas a kind of lifelong education to the public. [Czech university department usingTutor2000]

Content Management and DevelopmentThere is a request for improvement of some systems so that they better can handle contentmanagement and interconnection of content modules:

It’s necessary to improve the content management databases. In the 3rd platformupgrade we will explore the content management. There is software that onlymanages content that can be incorporated. [Portuguese private non-profit associa-tion using Aep e-cursos]

Interconnection of all created modules. [Slovak distance education institutionusing self-developed LMS]

Some interviewees also request LMS systems that are more open to collaboration withcontent suppliers and have better support for development and publication of content invarious file formats and media types:



The strategic collaboration with content suppliers should be developed. Black-board has some of this today. Concerning many courses, our institution acts as acontent supplier today. [Norwegian private college using BlackBoard]

More provisions for incorporation of more formats, not only HTM, PPT etc.[Czech technical university department using Tutor2000]

Support of different media. [Portuguese private university using TWT]It is desirable to use Classfronter to make simple homepages on the net.

[Norwegian college #7 using Classfronter]Tools for publishing of different kinds of material. [Norwegian college #9

using Classfronter]

Additional Features and CommentsSeveral interviewees wanted extra features in addition to those provided in their LMSsystem. Some of these were features that they probably would find in other systems, such asonline lectures, planning calendars, assessment tools, chat, automated students enrollment,audio and video streaming, form creation, statistical functions etc.

We would like to present online lectures. [Swiss private e-learning institution usingself-developed LMS]

A planning calendar. [Czech university using Tutor2000]-software tools: assessment, chat, automated students enrollment in courses and

exams, audio and video streaming; -course design: improvement of the currentdidactic environments, online administrative facilities, online retrieval of libraryresources. [Italian university using self-developed LMS]

Enrich content: multimedia, prior experience, management knowledge. Flexi-bility of content. “Anonymous” for students, students’ well being. [Portuguesecompany using EvoluiTech]

I would like to have a function for form creation, forms for registration, evalua-tion, application and so on. [Norwegian college # 6 using Classfronter]

The statistical function could have been used to make simple forms of courseevaluation on the way. This is possible; we just haven’t done it. [Norwegiancollege using Luvit]

I should like to see a statistical function in Luvit. Plus an administrative shellaround the professional content. [Norwegian college using Luvit]

Others wanted more special features such as modules for visualization of the learningprocesses, integrated study agendas, an offline navigator, and user-friendly authoringpackages for creation of simulations and virtual reality content:



I would like to add a module for students which can help them to organize andvisualize their own learning process, learning management! [Swedish universityusing Luvit]

Study agenda to be directly included as an internal part of LMS or automatedlink with IS Student. [Czech university department using Tutor2000]

Development of an offline Navigator in platform 2003: So the student must notstay online for longer times; after downloading the navigator will remember allactions. [German university using Virtual-U]

The possibility to work offline. As it is today, you have to work online all thetime, since the service is Web-based. [Norwegian private college using Black-Board]

TopClass and other LMSs in the near future will need to offer user-friendlyauthoring packages for teachers and trainers to create simulations and courses witha virtual reality dimension. [Northwestern European institute of technology #1 usingTopClass]

Finally, some comments were made regarding teacher training, internal courses, surveys ofstudents and contents:

Teacher training. Administrative development. From pre-enrollment to the obtain-ment of the title. The University should improve teacher training for virtual educa-tion. [Spanish university using Elias]

Courses for internal business use and benefit should be developed.[Norwegian private college using BlackBoard]

A global survey of students and content, in a time-frame of years. [Norwegiancollege #5 using Classfronter]





Important Findings about LMSImprovementsThe analysis revealed 13 important findings, which are presented in List 10, with regard tofeatures the interviewees would like to see in future LMS systems.

List 10. Thirteen important findings about LMS improvements

1. Better Systems Integration. Many interviewees wanted better integration betweenthe LMS systems and various other systems and services. Some claimed thatthere was a need for integration in general terms. Universities and collegeswere concerned about integration with the student management systems thatusually contain the central student databases with student records, examinationresults, fees etc. Some institutions also wanted integrated online paymentsystems. And the companies focused on integration with their human relationmanagement systems and competency management systems. A Norwegiandistance education institution mentioned the need for better integration with theonline course catalogue that it uses for marketing and with automatic tracking oftextbook shipment. Finally, it seems that some of the services within the LMSsystems could be better integrated.

2. Interest in Standardization. The analysis indicates that there is an interest in stan-dards and standardizations that can make it easier to exchange content and databetween LMS systems and between LMS systems and other systems. Some of theinterviewees spoke of the importance of standardization in general terms. Manywere concerned about the possibility to use, import, and export standardizedcourse content and learning objects. Two German experts spoke about the impor-tance of XML and metatagging. And many references were made to standardspecifications and initiatives such as SCORM, IMS, AICC and IEEE.

3. Local Presence, Language Support, and Special Characters. The analysis indicatesthat there is a request for local representatives and national language versions.Some of the systems don’t meet these needs very well. Some interviewees alsofocused on insufficient support for various alphabets that are needed inlanguage courses and special characters that are used in mathematics andchemistry courses.

4. Concern about Cost-effectiveness. A few interviewees were concerned aboutimproving cost-effectiveness and lack of necessary financial resources.

5. Multimedia and Broadband Urge. The analysis shows that there is an obviousrequest for additional bandwidth and better multimedia abilities. Severalinterviewees wanted to include video services such as streaming video,video-conferences, Web-cameras, and moving pictures. Audio services suchas voice communication and audio files were also requested. Some of theinterviewees especially focused on multimedia tools such as video-conferencing and voice chat for better synchronous communication.

6. Tests, Assignments, and Evaluations. The analysis indicates that several LMS sys-tems should improve their test and assignment tools. They could also beimproved with regard to evaluation, e-portfolio, commenting on student presen-tations, management of competencies, assessment tools, and reports.

7. Improved Communication and Collaboration. Many interviewees were concernedabout the need for better and more advanced communication and collabora-tion tools. Two simply stated that they wanted better communication possibilitiesand protected communication. Others requested better support and more toolsfor teamwork and collaboration. In addition, some especially focused on theneed for better tools for synchronous communication and immediate feedback.

8. Better Administrative Tools. There is a general need for better administrativesystems and tools. The analysis shows that many systems could have better toolsfor administration of students, tutors, and content. The interviewees asked forbetter group management tools, student record systems, improved course man-agement, and better password management facilities. Some interviewees morespecifically wanted better services for student tracking and reporting functions.

9. Simpler User Solutions. Several interviewees indicated that the systems could betoo complex for some applications. They requested simpler and user-friendliersolutions for teachers and administrators. One interviewee wanted shortcuts formore efficient use. Some Nordic interviewees also pointed out the need foreasy access to suppliers and developers.

10. More Flexible Systems. A few of the interviewees especially pointed out that theywanted more flexible solutions because they felt too dependent on the systems’intrinsic structure and design. One especially wanted better control of graphicaldesign, logos, etc. Another would like to have access to the system’s source code.

11. Interest in Mobile Learning and E-commerce. One interviewee wanted enhancedmobile services so that users could utilize mobile phones and PDAs to accessthe LMS systems. Another was interested in wireless access to the system.

12. Content Management and Development. There is a request for improvement ofsome systems so that they can better handle content management and inter-connection of content modules. Some interviewees also request LMS systemsthat are more open to collaboration with content suppliers and have bettersupport for development and publication of content in various file formats andmedia types.

13. Additional Features. Several interviewees wanted extra features in addition tothose provided in their LMS system. Some of these were features that they prob-ably would find in other systems, such as online lectures, planning calendars,assessment tools, chat, automated students enrollment, audio and video stream-ing, form creation, statistical functions etc. Others wanted more special featuressuch as modules for visualization of the learning processes, integrated studyagendas, an offline navigator, and user-friendly authoring packages for creationof simulations and virtual reality content.



Anecdote 9. Accessibility:Online Education for All

Computer conferencing and electronic mail have been used at RIT to lessen somecommunication barriers for persons with physical disabilities. They have permitteda blind teacher to communicate written material with seeing students and havealso facilitated his interactions with the hearing impaired without requiring theservices of an interpreter. They have similarly facilitated communication between arecently-deafened faculty member and his hearing students. (Coombs 1989, 184)

When I read this statement in Norman Coombs’84 article Using CMC to Overcome Physi-cal Disabilities (www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/resource1.html) back in1989, I understood that online education had an enormous potential for students with adisability. More recently, I have learned about these issues through NKI’s accessibilityproject that aims at adapting online courses and support services to meet the special needsof people with a disability and thereby improving the online education services for all. Theproject is still in progress, but so far it has focused on improving accessibility and audiocontent for students that are visually impaired. The project is financed by the NorwegianAgency for flexible learning in Higher Education (SOFF).

NKI’s partners in the project are the Association for Adapted Adult Education in Norway(www.funkis.no) and MediaLT (www.medialt.no). MediaLT is a small firm that has devel-oped and arranged a distance education program for the European Computer DrivingLicense (ECDL) that is especially adapted for people who are blind or partially sighted. InOctober 2001, the first blind student completed all seven course modules. According toMorten Tollefsen in MedialT, visually impaired computer users are dependent on compli-cated support devices like Braille displays, artificial speech synthesizers, and screen enlarg-ers. In the ECDL courses, MediaLT uses Daisy formatted course material, Chatterbox forspeech-based chatting, and tactile graphics for special purposes.

A web site or page is accessible if it is reasonably possible for anyone to access thecontent. Accessibility awareness could improve the quality of online education for all stu-dents, but it could be of special importance to students with a disability. An introduction toWeb accessibility is available from Webaim (www.webaim.org/intro/intro). The introduc-tion discusses five types of disabilities that affect Internet usage. These are: visual impair-ments, hearing impairments, mobility impairments, cognitive impairments, and seizure disor-ders. Further, the Web Accessibility Initiative (www.w3.org/WAI) provides some excellentonline resources for professionals. There are also several good online services for analyz-ing and evaluating accessibility of web sites. Bobby (www.cast.org/bobby) and Wave(http://wave.webaim.org/index.jsp) are two examples that generate automatic accessi-bility reports for your Web pages.


84 Coombs has later established EASI (www.rit.edu/~easi)

www-icdl.open.ac.uk/literaturestore/mindweave/resource1.html

www.funkis.no

www.medialt.no

www.webaim.org/intro/intro

www.w3.org/WAI

www.cast.org/bobby

http://wave.webaim.org/index.jsp

www.rit.edu/~easi

Using these resources, NKI has improved the accessibility of its web sites. The majorimprovements have been related to better navigation structures, inclusion of alternativedescriptions of graphic elements, and adaptation of more individual control over how theinformation could be presented. These improvements benefit all users, and are relativelyeasy to implement in well-structured web sites.

NKI’s accessibility project has also produced a number of audio files from existing text-books and other course readings. They include Daisy books, human narration, and speechsynthesis narration.

The standard used for Daisy books (www.daisy.org) originated in Sweden in 1994. Thebooks can be explained as a set of digital files that includes digital audio files with humannarration of the text, a marked-up file containing the text, a synchronization file to relatemarkings in the text file with time points in the audio file, and a navigation control filewhich enables the user to move smoothly between files while synchronization between textand audio is maintained. To develop Daisy books, NKI needed the course content in textfiles. For some of the textbooks, this was a real challenge, since some publishers did nothave the books available in text files or, for copyright reasons, were reluctant to give us thefiles. Our preliminary conclusion, with regard to the Daisy books we produced, is that theyare excellent to use, but far too time-consuming to develop. Further, the Daisy book files arelarge, and not suitable for distribution via the Internet.

Speech synthesis and digital audio files could be of great help to visually-impaired stu-dents, people with dyslexia, learners with preference for an auditive learning style, andstudents who can listen to audio while they drive or perform other work that is hard tocombine with reading. Therefore, NKI has developed a number of audio files for distri-bution via the Web. All audio files have been produced in the popular MP3 format so thatthey could be easily transferred via the Internet and played from PCs, MP3 players, minidisk players etc.

It is easy to produce MP3 files from human narration. We experienced that we wereable to obtain a more than acceptable quality by using an NKI employee as narrator. Butthe narrator needs time to feel comfortable with the textbook, read it aloud, and repeat sec-tions that were not successfully read the first time. So, we evaluated a number of tools forspeech synthesis and experimented with them in order to save time and money producingaudio files. We decided to use Voxit Budgie (www.voxit.se), and the resulting files seem tobe of an acceptable quality. A group of students has also been provided with the Budgiesoftware to develop audio files themselves. The audio files have just recently been offeredto real students, so we still don’t know how the students will evaluate NKI audio adven-tures.

All in all, the serious challenge regarding special online education services for studentswith a disability is that the cost often is high and that there are few users to shoulder thecosts. Even if there are public sources to support accessibility initiatives, we should focus onaffordable solutions that are beneficial to all users. If we can build these solutions intostandard courses, we will be able to provide a large amount of online courses andservices that students with a disability can benefit from.


www.daisy.org

www.voxit.se

A Personal View on Future Online EducationIt is hard to predict the future of online education. In this article, however, I will try to envis-age some of the developments towards 2010. My predictions are based on the history ofonline education and the trends that have been elucidated throughout this book.

Retrospective ObservationsDuring the 15-year period since the end of the 1980s we have seen the following devel-opments in the Nordic countries:

■ The number of online students has increased by a magnitude of 1,000.■ The number of online courses has increased by a magnitude of 1,000.■ The bandwidth has increased by a magnitude of 1000, from 300 bits per second to

300,000 bits per second.■ A large number of commercial and self-developed LMS systems have been developed.■ Online information developed from black-and-white text-only to also including colors,

graphics, and animations. Multimedia content has started to emerge.■ Communication costs have gradually become less dependent on time, which has

stimulated increased use of the Internet.■ Online communication costs have basically become independent on distance. We do

not pay more for global communication than we do for local communication. Thisphenomenon is pivotal for the globalization of online education.

■ Wireless local area networks and mobile communication have started to emerge.■ Mobile computer equipment is becoming more widespread.

All are evolutionary developments that were visible 15 years ago and not really hard topredict. The only really revolutionary development in online education during this period wasthe introduction of the Web. This technological development, which nobody foresaw,emerged as the development with the largest impact on online education.

Learning from the past, we may see that the major development in future online educationcould come from a new, revolutionary innovation that none of us can foresee. Hence, I



www.studymentor.com

have here concentrated on evolutionary developments that are possible to observe at themoment. However, if I were to point out one issue that could nurture a revolutionary devel-opment, I would suggest the emerging always-online lifestyle. Since more and more peoplepay monthly fees that are not dependent on how much they use the Internet, they will spendmore time online both as active users and as passive consumers of Internet services. Thisdevelopment will allow the Internet to compete with radio and television broadcasting andit will probably nurture completely new applications that may revolutionize onlineeducation.

We have also experienced setbacks that have degraded the value of online educationservices such as the proliferation of spam messages, viruses, and online commercials.These unwanted phenomena could reduce the effectiveness of online education and theycould hamper future use of the Internet as an effective educational medium.

Even though we have experienced tremendous developments in online education duringthe last 15 years, it is interesting to observe that written communication, maybe the mostimportant part of online teaching and learning, has not changed much. Most communica-tions still consist of plain text, and the time it takes to turn on the computer, receive e-mailand compose a message has not been reduced.

It is also timely to point out that development of online pedagogy has made relativelylittle progress. We tend to apply traditional pedagogy in a new environment, and we havebarely started to investigate pedagogical challenges such as how we can facilitate collab-orative learning in courses with individual pacing.

The Future that Used to BeIt is interesting to review the future, as it was perceived in the past. The following longcitation (Rekkedal and Paulsen, 1989) shows that most of the development was expected15 years ago. One may also sense that the authors expected internationalization andpedagogical development to come even further than it actually has:

Despite the fact that a number of institutions around the world have applied com-puter conferencing/computer-mediated communication to deliver educational pro-grams, or as part of their program, it is in our view correct to describe the majorityof these experiences as pilot trials or research studies carried out by individualenthusiasts. We can therefore only have some vague notions of the potential andpossibilities in the years to come. There are a number of aspects for future devel-opment and also a number of challenges:

(i) Technological developments. The prerequisite technology for educational com-puter conferencing consists of computer and telecommunication equipment. Techni-cal standards are developing continuously. Speed and storage capacity arerapidly increasing. The introduction of the ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Net-work) network will imply a large increase in the speed of data transfer. As theISDN network can transfer 64,000 bits/sec, data can be transferred 25 to 50

A P E R S O N A L V I E W O N F U T U R E O N L I N E E D U C AT I O N


times faster than with the 1,200 or 2,400 modems in use today. This situationopens up the potential for using color and graphics to a much larger extent than ispossible with the technology now in use.

(ii) System and program developments. The conferencing systems currently in usein education were generally not originally developed for distance learning. Thesystems are generally not user friendly. They normally do not include graphics andmathematical symbols. Consequently, there have been some restrictions on thesubjects and learning objectives, which could be adapted to teaching by com-puter-mediated communication. These restrictions will soon be eliminated. Bettersystems are already on their way.

(iii) Availability of computers and familiarity with computer applications. To someextent it might be claimed today that computer conferencing is best suited for stu-dents who are confident in using computers and/or for students who are inter-ested in computer technology or who study subjects where computers or computerapplications are relevant. There seems to be no doubt that the number of studentsand subjects suitable for teaching by computer conferencing, based on the aboveconsiderations, will expand rapidly.

(iv) Internationalization. Distance education is in the process of being internation-alized. Programs are offered across national borders. Computer conferencing willprobably speed up this process considerably. The authors of this article have them-selves studied and taught via computer conferencing in Norway, at ConnectedEducation and the New School of Social Research in New York. We have alsoseen that the Electronic University Network in the USA markets its courses inNorway. On the European scene there are important interests in transfer of univer-sity programs and credits within the EC. In these efforts we see co-operativeprojects between business/industry and university partners. One such organiza-tion, EuroPACE, distributes educational programs on high technology by satellite,supported by computer conferencing. It has been argued that computer-basedcommunication is especially suitable for communication in a foreign language. Itallows the participant to study and submit information with his/her personalrequirements for time and speed.

(v) Pedagogical developments and challenges. We have pointed out some possi-bilities of computer conferencing in Distance Education. We introduced this articleby referring to some media developments that had not fully lived up to expecta-tions. To some extent this may be explained by the slowness in developing thetechnology in its pedagogical applications and its theory. At this stage someexperience have been gained, but there is a long way to go before we knowhow to design learning based on computer conferencing or how to include com-puter conferencing as a viable addition to existing media and methods. (Rekkedaland Paulsen, 1989)



Important Current TrendsIn the remaining part of this article, the following important current trends are discussed inmore details:

■ The large-scale mega trend,■ The systems integration trend,■ The standardization trend,■ The market trend,■ The mobile trend,■ The broadband and multimedia trend,■ The globalization trend.

The large-scale trend is maintained as the mega trend of online education, and one mayargue that the integration trend, the standardization trend and the market trend merely areconsequences of large-scale trends, since it becomes necessary to rationalize and increaseefficiency as activity increases.

The Large-scale Mega TrendOnline education has increased considerably during the last years. Five years ago, atypical educational institution piloted a few online courses for a limited number of students.Today, many institutions are implementing a broad range of online education services to alltheir students. Evidence of the worldwide spread of e-learning in recent years is easy toobtain. No fewer than 60,000 courses are listed on the TeleCampus portal fromTeleEducation, New Brunswick, Canada (http://courses.telecampus.edu).

The current mega trend shows clearly that online education is shifting from small-scaleexperiments to large-scale operations. This mega trend was pointed out in the Cisaer project:

The interest in online education is high, and it seems to be proliferating rapidlyand globally. A Canadian competitive analysis (www.telelearn.ca/g_access/news/comp_analysis.pdf) shows that the primary expansion strategies are moreand diverse programs, international students, and new, attractive markets such ascorporate training. The Cisaer interviewees foresaw a future with more Web-courses, additional online services, better-quality courses, enhanced focus onteacher training, further collaborations with other institutions, and additionalorganizational consequences. (Paulsen 2000)

The Web-edu analyses confirm that there is a clear trend that institutions offer more onlinecourses today than they did three years ago. One may say that the trend is to go fromsmall-scale to large-scale online education. If one characterizes institutions that offer at least50 online courses as large-scale providers of online education, 30 of the 89 institutions(34%) Web-edu has data from could be characterized as large-scale providers. The analy-



http://courses.telecampus.edu

www.telelearn.ca/g_access/news/comp_analysis.pdf

www.telelearn.ca/g_access/news/comp_analysis.pdf

ses indicate that the trend towards large-scale online education has come further in theNordic countries (60%) than in the other regions.

The large-scale trend makes it necessary to focus much more on organizational issues,human resources, and division of labor. This could be a huge challenge for many educa-tional institutions.

The Systems Integration TrendWith the introduction of large-scale online education, the need for integration between LMSsystems, student management systems, and other student support services is increasing. Thenumber of system providers and educational institutions that recognize this need seems tobe increasing rapidly. Some pioneer institutions have successfully started the integrationprocess, but even the most advanced institutions have room for many improvements and fur-ther integration of additional services. There is a general lack of systems integration and thepotential for improvements is substantial. This is a major challenge for system providers,educational institutions, and even ministries of education that should stimulate and perhapscoordinate this integration on a national level.

The integration trend will result in new and better student support services, improvedcost-effectiveness, and competitive advantages for institutions that handle the integrationprocess successfully. It also implies that the institutions will be more dependent on theirsystems and that the systems will be more complex and harder to substitute.

The Standardization TrendThere is a trend towards standardization of online education. The benefits are obvious.With standards we will experience a more open online education world. It will be easierto identify courses and course content in public databases and portals. Courses and learn-ing objects will be reusable in other learning environments. LMS systems will becomeeasier to integrate with student management systems and other student support systems.Institutions will be less dependent on a single system provider.

Online educators in Europe are aware of the emerging e-learning standards, andseveral claim that their systems follow the standards. But so far relatively few state that thestandards are important to their institution, and e-learning standards do not seem to havehad much impact on online education in Europe.

But there is also a sound skepticism towards the emerging standards. Many Europeaneducators perceive the standards as dominated by North Americans. The university sectormay perceive the standards as supportive of the business and training initiative – not theuniversity sector. Many educators are skeptical about losing their pedagogical freedom,and they are not willing to spend limited resources on standardization before they arereally sure that they will benefit from the extra work and trouble.

The standardization trend is still in its infancy. It may have a huge impact on futureonline education, but many educators are skeptical of standardization initiatives. So, it ishard to predict where the standardization trend will lead us.



The Market TrendThe Cisaer project concluded that the financial barriers to online education are significant.The analysis indicates that there are few institutions that can claim that provision of Web-based courses has been an economic success, if they disregard external research anddevelopment grants. At the same time, most of the Web courses have relatively low enroll-ment. The cost of development and maintenance may be high, and there are many exam-ples of expensive pilot projects that experiment with high-cost, state-of-the-art technology. Allthis implies that it is necessary to focus much more on how online education could becomemore cost-effective. This includes a focus on how online courses could handle larger enroll-ment and prioritize cost-effective technology and development schemes.

The current development towards large-scale operation entails that it is increasinglyimportant that institutions establish an efficient, cost-effective infrastructure that supportsonline education. This includes systems and routines for course development, customerrelations management, course enrollment, student support, technical support, teachertraining and support, examinations, payments, and logistics.

The Web-edu project also concludes that cost-effectiveness becomes more important asthe institutions become large-scale providers of online education. The interviewees have,however, only a vague knowledge of the system’s maintenance and operating costs. Thecost and pricing structure for the commercial systems varies from system to system. Thismight make it difficult to compare real costs. Some interviewees were concerned abouthigh and increasing prices for the commercial LMS systems.

The Mobile TrendM-learning is a ”buzz-word” for mobile learning. It means learning that can take place any-time, anywhere with the help of a mobile computer device. M-learning has so far not hadany impact on education, but it is spurred by the general development of mobile technol-ogy and services such as the following:

■ Telecommunication companies have invested enormous resources in a broadbandmobile telephone infrastructure such as GPRS, 3G, and MMS.

■ The market is flooded by new and improved mobile terminals such as PDAs, tablet PCs,and advanced mobile phones, digital cameras, MP3 players, and pocket-sized multi-media jukeboxes as shown in Figure 24.

■ Private wireless networks are affordable and increasingly popular in offices and privatehomes.

■ Public wireless networks are available in an increasing number of airports, hotels,restaurants, gas stations, and other so called hot spots.

■ E-books could replace paper-based textbooks.



Figure 24. Multimedia Jukebox from Archos (www.archos.com)

But new technology is not enough for m-learning to succeed. Dye et al. (2003, i) concludethat:

…wireless Internet is a must for m-learning to take off. To cater for huge chunks ofdata that is common in most educational websites, there is a need for high-speedwireless data transfer. However, this should be at affordable costs to the generalpublic. The biggest impact m-learning will have on both students and teacher isincreased flexibility. As a result, learning will be able to take place in other envi-ronments. Increased flexibility will place some demands on both teacher and stu-dent. It will require the student to have a high level of discipline in order toachieve his or her academic goals, while the teacher might have no clear-cutdivision between working hours and leisure time.

The key to making m-learning courses widely adapted is to target devices thathave already penetrated the market and have good usability. There is no usecreating courses for a device that is not widely adapted. The user will not buy anew device for m-learning, but might use an existing device for something new,such as education. Technology might help education by providing an easier wayto communicate among peers as well as between students and teachers. Thepossibility of instant help from a peer or tutor creates an ideal environment forcollaborative learning.

Even though mobile data communication is increasing, it is likely that there will be distinctdifferences between mobile and stationary services. Mobile communication will probablycontinue to be slower and more expensive than stationary communication. The result is thatmobile and fixed communication will continue to be supplementary services that are useddifferently.

The mobile trend will introduce additional challenges and costs since online educatorshave to provide additional mobile services in parallel with their traditional fixed services.



www.archos.com

The Broadband and Multimedia TrendThe bandwidth capacity has increased steadily and significantly ever since onlineeducation was introduced. This development will continue in the foreseeable future andprovide online education with opportunities for more rich media content.

The Web-edu project showed that there is an obvious request for more bandwidth andmore multimedia abilities (page 301). Several interviewees wanted to include video serv-ices such as streaming video, video-conferences, Web-cameras, and moving pictures.Audio services such as voice communication and audio files were also requested. Some ofthe interviewees especially focused on multimedia tools such as video-conferencing andvoice chat for better synchronous communication.

The multimedia trend is also easy to observe in the electronic consumer market. Digitalcameras and video cameras have become affordable and omnipresent. Audio- and video-editing software are standard features on new PCs, and consequently ordinary PC-userscan now both utilize and produce multimedia content. Both legal and illegal Internetdistribution of digital music and movies has exploded lately. This development hasincreased people’s request for educational multimedia content.

Figure 25. Multimedia Web lecture made in Microsoft Producer.

Recent developments in speech synthesis have made it so understandable and user-friendlythat more learners may benefit from it. This include blind students, dyslectic students, andstudents who for example spend much time in a car. It is conceivable that in the future it willbe just as easy and inexpensive to “speech” a text as it is to print it.



But the multimedia development is approaching a crossroads, as all common mediatypes are available in a digital format. Video, which has been the most challenging formatto digitize since it requires much storage and bandwidth capacity, is already abundant onthe Internet. We will certainly experience much more digital content and a plethora of newdevices to present the content. However, perhaps the technical evolution of multimedia andbroadband services will change its focus when there are no more old media types to digi-tize?

A disturbing consequence of the multimedia trend is that the technology will requireeducational institutions to have more competence and resources for content development.It requires investments and costs that could make it difficult for small institutions to competewith larger institutions that have more students to bear the costs.

The Globalization TrendIn legal terms, according to Ishii and Lutterbeck (2001), education is an international com-modity, and as such falls under the regulations of the World Trade Organization (WTO)and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). As a consequence, nationalefforts leading toward any regulations in the area of education could be interpreted as atrade barrier that infringes the concept of free trade and international competition.

In the preface to her book Globalising Education. Trends and applications, RobinMason (1998) stated:

Unlike the soft drinks market, education is unlikely to be dominated by a few giantproviders. Why? Because it is too difficult; there is too little money to be made,too many complex issues to handle, and too great a need for «people skills»rather than technical skills.

But there are many indications of globalization in education:

■ The ongoing European harmonization of degrees, certificates, credits, and gradesencourages global mobility for online students.

■ The commercialization of education and the growing acceptance of tuition fees make itinteresting to increase income by targeting foreign students.

■ The proliferation of a few, predominantly North American, LMS systems such asWebCT and BlackBoard and the growing acceptance of e-learning standards makes iteasier to use foreign content and to collaborate with foreign institutions.

■ In Australia, education is one of the country’s most important export industries.

International delivery of online courses can be organized in many ways such as directdelivery to individuals in other countries, franchise of foreign programs, or joint partnershipsbetween equal institutions in different countries.

Independently of organization, one pivotal issue concerning global courses is how wellcultural issues are addressed. These issues include language, educational tradition,



perception of educational imperialism, national policy on certification and transfer ofcredits, and local support structures.

Many educators are concerned with the dominance of English as the language ofglobal education. Countries with a minor national language may find it difficult to competein a global market with countries that have English as their first language. Other educatorsare worried about cultural imperialism as a result of Western institutions export of onlinecourses to the Third World.

ReferencesIshii, K. and B. Lutterbeck.2001. Unexploited Resources of Online Education forDemocracy - Why the Future Should Belong to OpenCourseWare. First Monday, 6(11).(http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_11/ishii/index.html)

Dye, A., K’Odingo, J. A., and Solstad, B. 2003. Mobile Education - A Glance at TheFuture. (www.nettskolen.com/forskning/mobile_education.pdf)

Mason, R. 1998. Globalising Education. Trends and applications. New York, NY:Routledge.

Rekkedal, T. and M. F. Paulsen. 1989. Computer conferencing in distance education:Status and trends. European Journal of Education, 24(1):61-72.



http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_11/ishii/index.html

www.nettskolen.com/forskning/mobile_education.pdf

Sources of Further Information

Online CataloguesThere are a large number of online catalogues presenting courses and course providers.Among them are:

■ The World Lecture Hall: (www.utexas.edu/world/lecture)■ TeleCampus online course directory: (http://database.telecampus.com)■ TeleCampus, Listing of classes (http://telecampus.edu)■ Beta Online Course Database: (www.pbnet.com/external/disted.nsf)■ Arragob, Database of programs (www.arragon.com)■ Globewide Network Academy, Listing of online courses (www.gnacademy.org)■ New Promise Interactive Index of Online Courses and Degrees

(www.caso.com/index.htm)■ Peterson’s Distance Learning Database Site (www.petersons.com/dlearn)■ Directory of Online Colleges, Internet Universities and Training Institutes

(www.geteducated.com/dlsites.htm)

Recommended BooksSome classic books were written about online education before the Web was introduced.A significant early book was Mindweave edited by Mason and Kaye (1989). Later impor-tant contributions were Online education edited by Harasim (1990), Empowering networksedited by Waggoner (1992), Computer-mediated Communication and the Online Class-room edited by Berge and Collins (1995), and Learning Networks written by Harasim,Hiltz, Teles, and Turoff (1995). More recent books that could be recommended are:

■ Web-based Instruction (Khan 1997)■ Building a Web-based Education System (McCormack and Jones 1998)■ Web-based Training Cookbook. Everything you need to know for online training (Hall

1997)■ Web-Teaching, A Guide to Designing Interactive Teaching for the World Wide Web

(Brooks 1997)



www.utexas.edu/world/lecture

http://database.telecampus.com

http://telecampus.edu

www.pbnet.com/external/disted.nsf

www.arragon.com

www.gnacademy.org

www.caso.com/index.htm

www.caso.com/index.htm

www.geteducated.com/dlsites.htm

www.studymentor.com

■ Web-based Training: Using Technology to Design Adult Learning Experiences (Driscolland Alexander 1998)

■ Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace: Effective Strategies for the Online Class-room (Palloff and Pratt 1999)

■ Virtual Learning: A Revolutionary Approach to Building a Highly Skilled Workforce(Schank 1997)

■ Creating the Virtual Classroom: Distance Learning with the Internet (Porter 1997)

Online Education JournalsThere are many journals related to online education, but the quality and sustainability variesconsiderably. The following is an alphabetical list that should be of interest to online educa-tors. Additional lists are available from ICDL (www-icdl.open.ac.uk/lit2k/journals.ihtml)and IRRODL (www.irrodl.org/journalpg.html).

The American Journal of Distance Education (www.ajde.com) is the internationally recog-nized journal of research and scholarship in the field of American distance education.

Best Educational E-practices (www.spjc.edu/eagle/BEEP/issues.htm) is a publication ofProject Eagle, St. Petersburg College.

Computer-Mediated Communication Magazine (www.december.com/cmc/mag/) hasbeen reviewed after it ran issues from May 1994 to January 1999. It reported on people,events, technology, public policy, culture, practices, study, and applications related tohuman communication and interaction in online environments.

Educational Technology & Society (http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/) is a quarterlyjournal that seeks academic articles on the issues affecting the developers of educationalsystems and educators who implement and manage such systems.

Elearningeuropa (www.elearningeuropa.info) is a web site for European e-learning.eLearning Journal (www.elearningjournal.com) is a weekly e-mail newsletter synthesizing

important news, trends, resources and organizations that impact the e-learning market-place.

E-learning Magazine (www.elearningmag.com/elearning/) is a magazine fordistributed learning.

eLearn magazine (www.elearnmag.org) is published by ACM, a non-profit educationalassociation serving those who work, teach, and learn in the various computing-relatedfields.

elearningpost (www.elearningpost.com) is a digest of daily links to articles and newsstories about Corporate Learning, Community Building, Instructional Design, KnowledgeManagement, Personalization and more.

The European Journal of Open and Distance Learning (www.eurodl.org) is an attempt tocreate a European online journal for discussion of ODL issues.

IMEJ (http://imej.wfu.edu) is a prototype of an interactive multimedia electronic journaledited and produced at Wake Forest University.

International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning (www.irrodl.org) is a

S O U R C E S O F F U R T H E R I N F O R M AT I O N


www-icdl.open.ac.uk/lit2k/journals.ihtml

www.irrodl.org/journalpg.html

www.spjc.edu/eagle/BEEP/issues.htm

www.december.com/cmc/mag/

http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/

www.elearningeuropa.info

www.elearningjournal.com

www.elearningmag.com/elearning/

www.elearnmag.org

www.elearningpost.com

www.eurodl.org

http://imej.wfu.edu

www.irrodl.org

www.ajde.com

refereed e-journal of advance research, theory and best practice in open and distancelearning worldwide.

Intervir (www.intervir.org) is an online journal of education, technology and politics.Published in Portuguese and English.

JEDlet Journal (www.jedlet.com) presents tips on how to run business and training initia-tives more efficiently.

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (www.ascusc.org/jcmc/) has been onthe Web quarterly since June 1995.

Journal of Distance Education/Revue de l’enseignement à distance(http://cade.icaap.org) is an international publication of the Canadian Association forDistance Education (www.cade-aced.ca).

The Journal of Distance Learning Administration is a peer-reviewed electronic journaloffered free each quarter over the Web. The journal welcomes manuscripts based onoriginal work by practitioners and researchers with specific focus on implications for themanagement of distance education programs. (www.westga.edu/~distance/jmission.html)

Learnativity (www.learnativity.com) is a web site with resources for online educators.Learning in the New Economy (www.linezine.com) is a publication claiming to introduce

the best thinking on learning, performance, knowledge, and human capital in the NewEconomy.

Learning Circuits (www.learningcircuits.org) is the American Society for Training &Development’s (ASTD) journal about e-learning.

Malaysian Journal of Distance Education (www.usm.my/Journal/jpjjm/) is available inan English and Malaysian version.

New Horizons in Adult education (www.nova.edu/~aed/newhorizons.html) is an elec-tronic journal, founded in 1987, focused on current research and ideas in adult education.

Learning Technology (http://lttf.ieee.org/learn_tech/) is a publication of IEEE ComputerSociety, Learning Technology Task Force.

La Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa (http://edutec.rediris.es/) is a journalthat gathers articles and reflections generated relating to educational technology in Span-ish.

Syllabus (www.syllabus.com) is a monthly publication focusing on technology in highereducation.

T.H.E. Journal (www.thejournal.com) is a widely-read education technology publication,which has served educators for over 30 years.

The Technology Source (http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp) is a peer-reviewed bimonthlyperiodical published by the Michigan Virtual University.

Training magazine (www.trainingmag.com) is a magazine that advocates training andworkforce development as a business tool.

The Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/) is apeer-reviewed e-journal with an international scope.



www.jedlet.com

www.ascusc.org/jcmc/

http://cade.icaap.org

www.cade-aced.ca

www.westga.edu/~distance/jmission.html

www.learnativity.com

www.linezine.com

www.learningcircuits.org

www.usm.my/Journal/jpjjm/

www.nova.edu/~aed/newhorizons.html

http://lttf.ieee.org/learn_tech/

http://edutec.rediris.es/

www.syllabus.com

www.thejournal.com

http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp

www.trainingmag.com

http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/

www.intervir.org

Canadian Postscript

Dr. Dominique Abrioux is President of Athabasca University. Heis actively involved in national and international distanceeducation initiatives, most notably as founding president of theCanadian Virtual University; International Council For Open andDistance Education (ICDE) vice-president for North America;and International Commission Member of the (US) Council forHigher Education Accreditation (CHEA). In 2003, he wasconferred with the honorary degree of Doctor of The Universityby The Open University (United Kingdom).

I first met this book’s author in Barcelona (1998) where we were both attending a thinktank on the potential establishment of an ICDE85 Virtual University. Like many initiatives ofthis sort, whether national or international, this exploratory meeting did not have anytangible results directly linked to its raison d’être, though it did allow me to meet Paulsenand, through him, to catch up on the development of Nordic distance education and itstransition to the online environment. Like many distance education academics, my interest inthe contributions of Nordic countries to the development of distance education had beensparked by Börje Holmberg’s pioneering work in the field, though it had also later beentweaked by Bernt Ottem, a Norwegian visiting scholar who spent a sabbatical atAthabasca University in the early 1980s and shared with us his innovative approach toteaching music at a distance.

On several occasions since our Barcelona meeting I have had the opportunity to hearPaulsen present around themes and research that this book expands upon. Moreover, hisappointment as an adjunct professor at Athabasca University (where he also taught anonline course from abroad) and his contribution to our online journal86 both as reviewerand contributor (the article Online Education Support Systems in Scandinavian and AustralianUniversities on page 257 in this book is based on an article from this journal) haveenhanced my familiarity with his work. It was, however, my perusal of the manuscript for



85 The International Council for Open and Distance Education (www.icde.org)

86 The International Review on Research in Open and Distance Learning (www.irrodl.org)

www.studymentor.com

www.icde.org

www.irrodl.org

this book that led me to accept that a brief Canadian perspective on the issues raised bythe author might also be of interest to its readers.

Much of the insight into Nordic online learning provided by Paulsen is equallyapplicable to the Canadian context, but it is his rallying of Nordic countries to considerand coordinate their online education development both as an export-related economicgrowth strategy and as a defense against what he terms “American instructional imperial-ism” that most hits home. There is, however, a twist: English being one of Canada’s officiallanguages, it should be much easier for Canada to capitalize on its online education as anexport industry, but this same linguistic feature of Canada also makes is more susceptible tothe importing of courses and their ingrained cultural biases from online exporters such asthe United States, Australia and the United Kingdom.

In a country where education remains a heavily defended provincial jurisdiction, andwhere no related national strategy seems possible (there is no national department ofeducation as is the case with our neighbor to the south), the majority of Canada’s publiclyfunded universities engage autonomously in online education, albeit at very different levels.Given the widely accepted practice of allowing comparable credits earned from one insti-tution to be transferred to a different credential awarding university, and the fact that onlineeducation does not respect provincial (never mind national) boundaries, the lack of coordi-nation at the national, inter-provincial, and inter-institutional levels has given rise to anonline university market that is characterized by duplication, redundancy, and restrictedeconomies of scale. With the recent dismemberment of the Open Learning Institute and thepending amalgamation to the Télé-université du Québec by the Université du Québec àMontréal, Athabasca University, Canada’s Open University, is now the only large-scale (byCanadian standards) national or even provincial online university.87

In order to better serve Canadian students, to defend its domestic market and to expandinternationally, Athabasca University conceived of the Canadian Virtual University – univer-sité virtuelle canadienne (www.cvu-uvc.ca). It was incorporated in January 2000 andwithin one year comprised a consortium of nine publicly funded universities committed toworking together and combining their distance and online programs so that students at anyof the member universities could benefit from the courses offered by other consortiummembers. This strategy mirrored that being implemented across many US states or regions(though not across the entire US), but CVU-UVC sought to further distinguish itself both fromthese and from the now defunct Canadian Telecampus portal referred to by Paulsen by: a)only including in its catalogue complementary, that is not competing, programs; b) reduc-ing barriers that made it difficult for students from one member institution to take coursesfrom another member institution (e.g. academic restrictions on the number of equivalentcourses that could be taken from another member institution; special fees levied by bothinstitutions and associated with ‘visiting’ student status; cumbersome administrative



87 For the most recent case study of Athabasca University, see my chapter in The Virtual University: Modelsand Messages; Lessons From Case Studies. Ed. Susan d’Antoni. Unesco Publishing: International Institutefor Educational Planning. 2003. (www.unesco.org/iiep/eng/focus/elearn/webpub/)

www.cvu-uvc.ca

www.unesco.org/iiep/eng/focus/elearn/webpub/

processes) such that the consortium was as transparent to students as possible; c) centraliz-ing student services associated with taking courses through the CVU-UVC consortium (e.g.recruitment, advising); d) collaborating on new course and program development; and e)advancing a common online research agenda.

Today, CVU-UVC regroups ten members, two hundred and seventy programs, and onethousand six hundred and ninety individual courses. University members are well satisfiedwith their principal return (new enrolments) on human and financial investment, but sincestudents enroll in courses and programs directly with their home university, correlating enroll-ment increases with activity on the CVU-UVC portal is no easy task. The fact that memberscontinue to pay a very low annual fee (Cdn. $5,000), primarily because of the support forthe secretariat provided by the Province of Alberta (which funds Athabasca University), cer-tainly contributes to the level of satisfaction. Principal advantages attributed by members tomembership in the CVU-UVC include: increased course registrations; improved regionaland national visibility for their distance and online initiatives; political recognition for work-ing collectively; opportunities for professional development; greater awareness about devel-opments in and strategies around online education.

This notwithstanding, CVU-UVC has had to face several key issues during its brief historyand some of these may well be similar to, or have relevance for, the Nordic examples andrecommendations cited by Paulsen.

In order to attract members both during its launch and in subsequent years, several ofCVU-UVC’s founding principles had to be watered down. The intention of not listing com-peting programs was never truly implemented and was formally reversed by the Board ofDirectors in 2003. Collaboration at the program level, never mind at the course develop-ment level, has remained elusive, as has the identification of a common research agenda.Similarly, the goal of having all member institutions treat CVU-UVC credits as if they hadbeen awarded by the student’s home university has not been achieved, primarily becausethis would have involved changes in policy at the institutional rather than the programmaticlevel, and dual-mode universities do not have the culture to even contemplate this. More-over, the consortium mix of non-traditional institutions (i.e. Athabasca University, Open Uni-versity of British Columbia and Télé-université du Québec) and campus-based universitieswith peripheral distance education programs that could not drive significant out-of-the-boxthinking at the institutional level, also resulted in the goal of creating transparent inter-institutional administrative processes not having been fully achieved. While these last twoobjectives have not been completely met, it does need to be stated that the CVU-UVC hasnevertheless achieved marked improvements for its students in transfer credit acceptanceand administrative transparency.

The fact that this consortium’s development was almost entirely self-funded by the members(a very small development grant of Cdn. $100,000 was received from the Government ofCanada), and that it sought to regroup existing distance and online curriculum offered by itsmember institutions, have meant that there is no common LMS system and hence no economyof scale or consistency (for academics, students, and administrators) in the development anddelivery of the collective online curriculum. This outcome leads it to very much resemble the

C A N A D I A N P O S T S C R I P T


multi-platform fledgling Finnish Virtual University (FVU), though a key difference is that the CVU-UVC curriculum has been designed by individual members, not by or for the consortium. Likeits Finnish counterpart, the Canadian Virtual University seeks to serve its national students firstand has aspirations to use its portal to export its members’ educational programs; unlike theFVU, the CVU-UVC does not intend to offer its exported products in other than its officialnational languages. The absence of a common LMS and the fact that its courses, programsand credentials are linked to the individual university rather than the consortium, make it verydifficult for CVU-UVC institutions to leverage the consortium internationally, an experience thatmay be relevant to any Nordic international strategy in this area.

In sharp contrast to the FVU which has received a commitment of some ten million eurosprimarily from its national government, the Canadian Virtual University has not benefitedfrom significant government funding and so should escape the fate of the three Swedish dis-tance education consortia or the Danish Virtual University cited by Paulsen. CVU-UVC, afterall, is a grassroots operation, with ownership and commitment driven by the institutionsthemselves, or by specific programs within a member university.

The Canadian context, and the experience of Athabasca University which, like NKI, hashad to transform its pedagogical, student support and administrative models in order that theymaximize the online distance learning environment, also lend considerable support to theother theses advanced by Paulsen. As in the Nordic countries, there is no national allegianceeither to student management systems or to LMS systems. This notwithstanding, PeopleSoftand SCT Banner dominate the former market, and WebCT the latter, though Blackboard,Lotus Notes platforms (for business programs), and homegrown products are also significantplayers. The fact that there is no linguistic barrier for Canadian institutions that offer coursesand programs in English when they adopt a propriety LMS does mean, however, that theyare understandably much more likely to do this than are their Nordic counterparts.

Paulsen would have as much difficulty identifying a completely virtual or online university inCanada as he does in Nordic countries. Athabasca University comes closest to this, butthough its graduate programs are all delivered predominately online, like NKI it has had tomaintain much of its undergraduate curriculum in parallel print/telephone and online models,lest traditionally disadvantaged learners be further disadvantaged by the digital divide.88 Justas Paulsen reports is the case in Nordic countries, print still plays an important role, usually inthe form of core textbooks, even in programs that are predominately online. In programswhere both print/telephone and online infrastructures are available to students, they take fulladvantage of the opportunity to engage in human interaction with their tutors over the tele-phone as well as through e-mail. To date, the primary advantages of the online learningenvironment include: the establishment of a community of learners that facilitates group workand peer support; communication with tutors and the electronic transmission of assignments;accessing complementary library and other secondary web-based resources; and conductingadministrative and student service related activities (online advising, registration etc.).



88 This notwithstanding the fact that a 2003 survey showed that 97% of Athabasca University students hadInternet access from home (and almost two thirds of these had high speed access).

As is the case with NKI, Athabasca University regards its niche as flexible learning. Assuch, students enroll in undergraduate courses year-round and complete courses at theirown pace. They are not part of a class cohort and this serves to reinforce the importanceof addressing what Paulsen identifies as the greatest challenge for online educators: thedilemma between learner-driven individualized learning and faculty-promoted collaborativelearning, though most of Athabasca’s undergraduate faculty (unlike the vast majority of theirCanadian colleagues) would not fall into this camp. This notwithstanding, and based onour Canadian experience, I would fine-tune Paulsen’s dilemma by emphasizing that manyof the learners who come to us because of our flexibility also expect their educational expe-rience to include some collaborative learning. Understandably, they want to have it bothways, and our major pedagogical task is to rise to this challenge and to develop coopera-tive learning activities that add value for individually paced learners.

From the administrative perspective, the Canadian experience also supports the book’sNordic-derived warning that the online education costing model will continue to pose avery significant problem if its scalability is not satisfactorily addressed. The blending ofcosts formerly clearly attributable in traditional distance learning either to course develop-ment (fixed) or course delivery (variable) poses a real problem for the scalability ofCanadian online learning, as ‘class size’ and associated teaching costs assume the costingimportance that they have in classroom-based education. This, of course, is premised on acohort-driven model, though there is a comparable concern with individualized onlinelearning if it fails to re-engineer its pedagogy and administrative processes for the onlineenvironment and is then faced with additional rather than replacement costs.

While Nordic and Canadian online education today would seem to face many similarissues and challenges, there does appear to be one significant point of divergence,probably linked to the highly competitive nature of the Canadian e-learning market and itsgreater subjection to national and transnational competition. In a country where universitytuition costs are significant, where degree programs at all institutions are modularized into3-credit components, where there is a strong tradition of credit transfer, and where capacityproblems in campus-based institutions significantly reduce flexibility and course selection,campus-based students are increasingly voting with their mouse and taking significant partsof their undergraduate degrees online from other institutions. Efficient, timely, and effectiveservice represents one of the key ways in which providers can compete for this business(the others being branding, quality, and flexibility), but this necessitates the development ofa very strong institution-wide service culture (not exactly a hallmark of universities!). Theimportance of a strong service culture is magnified in the online environment, where clientsnot only expect 24/7, just-in-time access to resources and services, but also demonstrateexpectations that are forever increasing. In turn, this requires a complete re-thinking byonline providers of how services are accessed (e.g. intelligent data bases; web-enabled;call-centres) and the role of academic, professional, and administrative staff.

Mindful of Paulsen’s push for Nordic countries to create new regional and internationalmarkets, of the curriculum modularization commitment contained in the Bologna Declaration,and of the trend towards significant tuition fees in several Nordic countries, the concept of

C A N A D I A N P O S T S C R I P T


online learning as a service industry may well be the most important lesson that Nordicproviders of online education could take from their Canadian counterparts. Failure to do somay well jeopardize not just any international expansionist strategy, but also local andregional markets.



List of FiguresFigure 1. Online education surpassing Old Traditional University .............................12Figure 2. The online teacher’s workload..............................................................24Figure 3. The jigsaw model for online education support systems.............................27Figure 4. The hub model for integration of online education support systems ..............28Figure 5. Mind map of online teaching terms.......................................................33Figure 6. The hexagon of cooperative freedom ....................................................43Figure 7. Potential market as a result of flexibility in time and space .........................47Figure 8. Flexibility and potential market coverage................................................47Figure 9. Mind map of facilitation techniques ......................................................63Figure 10. The Troll with three heads: Learning, Management, and System ...............136Figure 11. American educational imperialism ......................................................190Figure 12. The jigsaw model for online education support systems...........................259Figure 13. Monthly variation in active NKI students...............................................273Figure 14. Number of course enrollments per year on

NKI online courses since 1987..........................................................273Figure 15. NKI’s model for multimedia content .....................................................276Figure 16. Timeline showing NKI research activities..............................................276Figure 17. The EKKO LMS metaphor .................................................................279Figure 18. The first-generation user-interface ........................................................280Figure 19. The second-generation user-interface ...................................................282Figure 20. Third-generation NKI home-page........................................................283Figure 21. Example of a third-generation NKI program homepage ..........................283Figure 22. NKI’s integrated systems for online student support .................................285Figure 23. Industrialized online education ...........................................................294Figure 24. Multimedia Jukebox from Archos (www.archos.com)...............................320Figure 25. Multimedia Web lecture made in Microsoft Producer..............................321


www.archos.com

List of TablesTable 1. Online teaching methods, devices, and techniques ...................................59Table 2. Assessment matrix used for assignment analysis in an ongoing online course...70Table 3. Perceptions of preactive and interactive workload.....................................76Table 4. Overview of possible teaching techniques...............................................86Table 5. Framework for online teaching techniques ...............................................92Table 6. List of regional Web-edu analyses .......................................................153Table 7. Types of educational institutions ...........................................................154Table 8. List of countries, official languages, inhabitants, and Internet penetration .....155Table 9. Regional list of institutions with more than 50 online courses .....................157Table 10. Distribution of institutions per number of courses......................................158Table 11. Software tools for course creation found in European analysis ...................159Table 12. Alphabetical list of commercial LMS systems in the Web-edu analyses ........165Table 13. List of institutions with self-developed LMS systems ...................................177Table 14. Nordic Web-sites of interest to online educators .....................................193Table 15. Instances of LMS systems in 54 Norwegian institutions of higher education...198Table 16. Nordic institutions sorted by country .....................................................201Table 17. Information about surveyed institutions sorted by LMS ..............................203Table 18. LMS systems sorted by original nationality .............................................205Table 19. Software tools for course creation found in Nordic analysis ......................206Table 20. Online education support systems used by the

Australian institutions visited ................................................................259Table 21. Number of LMS systems in Australia’s 34 universities ...............................261Table 22. Number of LMS systems used in 54

Norwegian institutions of higher education............................................262Table 23. Numbers of SMS systems used in Australia’s 34 universities ......................265Table 24. The NKI Distance Education Departments in 2000 .................................274Table 25. Increases in NKI online courses and enrollments .....................................275

Noteworthy ListsList 1. Seven interesting online teaching opportunities ............................................54List 2. Fourteen interventions to stimulate learner persistence and reduce dropouts .......57List 3. Five strategies to organize and improve online assessment.............................70List 4. Eight strategies to reduce teacher workload ................................................76List 5. Eight strategic online education recommendations ......................................142List 6. Six strategic recommendations from the Web-edu project ............................183List 7. Nine barriers to Scandinavian online education collaboration ......................192List 8. Six important LMS findings related to Nordic issues ....................................213List 9. Twelve reasons for NKI’s success ............................................................288List 10. Thirteen important findings about LMS improvements ..................................310


List of PhotographiesErwin Wagner Photo: Private. Reprinted with permission from Erwin Wagner .....13Ingeborg Bø Photo: Private. Reprinted with permission from Ingeborg Bø ......15Morten Flate Paulsen Photo: Author’s private photo ................................................17Line Fjellvær Photo: Private. Reprinted with permission from Line Fjellvær ........51Bjørn Helgeby Photo: Private. Reprinted with permission from Bjørn Helgeby .....83Bente Rui Photo: Private. Reprinted with permission from Bente Rui ..........132Søren Nipper Photo: Private. Reprinted with permission from Søren Nipper.....215Carl Holmberg Photo: Private. Reprinted with permission from

Carl Holmberg and Lena Nordung......................................233Morten Flate Paulsen Photo: Gudjón Ólafsson. Reprinted with permission from

Gudjón Ólafsson .............................................................255NKI Photo: Copyright NKI .......................................................272Dominique Abrioux Reprinted with permission from Athabasca University...............327


About the AuthorMorten Flate Paulsen is the Director of Development at the NKI Internet College. He fin-ished the degree of Master of Science in Engineering at the Norwegian Institute of Techno-logy in 1980 and became Doctor of Education at Pennsylvania State University in 1998.In 2003, he was re-appointed Adjunct Professor for a second three-year period, at theAthabasca University, Centre for Distance Education.

In 1982, he started working for NKI (Norwegian Knowledge Institute), the majorprovider of distance education in Norway. There he worked in a team that established theNKI College of Computer Science as a private, traditional, face-to-face campus. So, forseveral years he taught face-to-face courses on information technology in an organizationwith much expertise in distance education.

In 1986, Paulsen became one of the very first European online educators when heinitiated the development of the EKKO computer conferencing system and taught his firstonline course. Then he initiated the NKI Internet College in 1987. This college may havebeen the first European online college, and few (if any) online colleges in the world havebeen longer in continuous operation. Since then, he has worked continuously in the fieldand published a number of books, articles and reports about the topic. Paulsen is a well-known speaker at conferences and seminars and participates often in public debates aboutonline-education.

In 1990, he enrolled in the doctoral program at the Pennsylvania State University,Department of Adult Education and Instructional Systems. As a graduate assistant at theAmerican Center for the Study of Distance Education, he established The Distance Educa-tion Online Symposium (DEOS) as an online adjunct to the American Journal of DistanceEducation. DEOS consists of DEOSNEWS, the world’s first online journal related todistance education, and DEOS-L, an accompanying discussion forum still vibrant in 2003.Paulsen edited 52 issues of DEOSNEWS and DEOS-L moderator the two first years.

Paulsen has participated in nine European research projects. In the Cisaer project heconducted an international analysis of web-based education, and in the Web-edu projecthe studied experiences with LMS systems used in Europe. At the moment, he is investigatingfindings from open and distance learning in the Nordic and Baltic countries as a partner inthe Boldic project and the state-of-the-art in European online education through his partici-pation in the Delphi project.

Paulsen taught his first online course at a distance via a 300 bit per second modem in1987. In 1988, he co-taught his first international course for the New York basedConnected Education. Later he has taught NKI courses online while living in Pennsylvaniaand Canadian master students while living in Oslo. In 2003, he taught his first m-learningcourse via a 300,000 bit per second wireless Internet connection at home and a PDA withmobile connection to the Internet when he traveled.

Paulsen has designed and developed several online courses. Most recently, he hasbeen project manager for the Specialization Program in International Online Education(SPICE), which is a five courses, master level, program. Paulsen’s interest in online


education is also evident in his dissertation Teaching Techniques for Computer-mediatedCommunication and in his Theory of Cooperative Freedom.

A B O U T T H E A U T H O R
